Sunday, 30 October 2011

Ang Tunay na Kahulugan ng Isaias 9:6

Request ni Romeo Contreras:

ISAIAH 9:6 Sapagka't sa atin ay ipinanganak ang isang bata, sa atin ay ibinigay ang isang anak na lalake; at ang pamamahala ay maaatang sa kaniyang balikat: at ang kaniyang pangalan ay tatawaging Kamanghamangha, Tagapayo, MAKAPANGYARIHANG DIOS, Walang hanggang Ama, Pangulo ng Kapayapaan.



isa pong hula yn s ating panginoong Jesus..xa po ay tinawag n makapangyarihang Dios jn..at ito po ay ginagamit ng mga mngangaral n ngtuturong c cristo ay dios..maari ko po b itong mlinawan,,mga kapatid?


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

Isang HEBREW BIBLE, ang orihinal na wikang ginamit sa
pagkakasulat ng AKLAT NI ISAIAS
ISA sa pinakapaboritong talata na palasak na palasak  na ginagamit ng mga naniniwalang si Cristo ay Diyos ay ang nasa ISAIAS 9:6 na ating sisipiin:

Isaias 9:6  “Sapagka't sa atin ay IPINANGANAK ANG ISANG BATA, sa atin ay ibinigay ang isang ANAK NA LALAKE; at ang pamamahala ay maaatang sa kaniyang balikat: at ANG KANIYANG PANGALAN AY TATAWAGING Kamanghamangha, Tagapayo, MAKAPANGYARIHANG DIOS, WALANG HANGGANG AMA, Pangulo ng Kapayapaan.”

Walang mababasa sa Biblia na ang BATA ang MAKAPANGYARIHANG DIYOS o siya ang WALANG HANGGANG AMA.

Ang sabi sa talata:

ANG KANIYANG PANGALAN AY TATAWAGIN

hindi sinabing:

ANG BATA AY TATAWAGING MAKAPANGYARIHANG DIYOS… o kaya ay

ANG BATA AY ANG MAKAPANGYARIHAN DIYOS, WALANG HANGGANG AMA, ETC.

Dahil imposible na ang MAKAPANGYARIHAN DIYOS ay ipanganak ng isang tao at lumabas sa daigdig bilang isang BATA. Ganito sabi ng Biblia:

Bilang 23:19  “ANG DIOS AY HINDI TAO na magsisinungaling, NI ANAK NG TAO na magsisisi; Sinabi ba niya, at hindi niya gagawin? O sinalita ba niya, at hindi niya isasagawa?”

Niliwanag ng Biblia na ang Diyos ay HINDI TAO, NI ANAK NG TAO. Kaya kung ipipilit na ang talagang Diyos ang BATA na IPINANGANAK na binabanggit sa Isaias 9:6, ay napakaliwanag na KOKONTRAHIN noon ang talatang iyan.

Kaya nga atin na ngayong natitiyak ngayon pa lang na ang salitang MAKAPANGYARIHANG DIYOS at iba pa, ay hindi talaga tumutukoy sa bata. Dahil ang TUNAY NA DIYOS ay hindi ipinanganganak at hindi maaaring maging ANAK NG TAO.

Kaya nga dahil sa ang banggit ay:

ANG KANIYANG PANGALAN AY TATAWAGIN

Samakatuwid ang mga salitang: KAMANGHAMANGHA, TAGAPAYO, MAKAPANGYARIHANG DIOS, WALANG HANGGANG AMA, PANGULO NG KAPAYAPAAN.” Ay hindi tumutukoy sa bata kundi sa kaniyang PANGALAN, maliwanag kung gayon na ang PANGALAN na ipantatawag sa bata ay ang may LITERAL MEANING o ang siyang may katumbas ng mga salitang nabanggit at hindi ang mismong bata ang tinutukoy ng mga salitang ito.

Ano ang PANGALANG ito?

Ating tunghayan sa isang salin ng Biblia na inilathala ng mga JUDIO:

Isaiah 9:6 “For a child is born unto us, a son is given unto us; and the government is upon his shoulder; and his name is called PELE-JOEZ-EL-GIBBOR-ABI-AD-SAR-SHALOM; [The Jewish Publication Society, 1917 ]

Sa Filipino:

Isaias 9:6 “Sa atin ay ipinanganak ang isang bata, isang anak na lalake ay ibinigay sa atin; at ang pamamahala ay nasasa kaniyang balikat; at ang kaniyang pangalan ay tatawaging PELE- JOEZ-EL-GIBBOR-ABI-AD-SAR-SHALOM”

Ang pangalang PELE- JOEZ-EL-GIBBOR-ABI-AD-SAR-SHALOM, ay isa sa mga PANGALAN ng Panginoong JESUS o iyong tinatawag sa English na THEOPHORIC NAME.

Ano ba ang ibig sabihin ng salitang THEOPHORY?

"Theophory[1] refers to the practice of embedding the name of a god or a deity in, usually, a proper name. Much Hebrew theophory occurs in the Bible, particularly in the Old Testament..."



Ang THEOPHORY ay ang paglalagay ng PANGALAN ng Diyos sa PANGALAN na itinatawag sa TAO.

Dahil may mga PANGALAN sa Biblia na nagtataglay ng PANGALAN ng Diyos, Mga halimbawa:


Ezrael – Help of God

GabrielGavriel – Man of GodGod has shown Himself MightyHero of God or Strong one of God

Gaghiel – Roaring Beast of God

Gamaliel – Reward of God

Hamaliel – Grace of God

Hanael – Glory of God

Immanuel – God with us

Imriel – Eloquence of God

Iruel – Fear of God

Ishmael, Ishamael – Heard by GodNamed by God, or God Hearkens

Yisrael – Struggles with God or Prince of God

Elijah (Elias) – Whose God is Jah, God Jah, The Strong[dubious  ] Jah, God of Jah, My God is Jah. Reference to the meaning of both (Eli)-(Jah)

Isaiah  Salvation of Yahweh

Jeremiah – "Raised by YahwehYahweh exalts"Yahweh Appointed""Yahweh's Chosen"

Jeshaiah – Salvation of Yahweh

Ang mismong PANGALAN ni JESUS:

Yehoshua (Joshua, Jesus) Yahweh saves, Yahweh is Savour, Yahweh is my Salvation


Kaya nga ang banggit ay ANG KANIYANG PANGALAN at hindi sinabi na ANG KANIYANG MGA PANGALAN, dahil ang PELE-JOEZ-EL-GIBBOR-ABI-AD-SAR-SHALOM, ay ISANG MAHABANG PANGALAN LAMANG, wala itong tuldok ni kuwit sa pagitan.

Kaya isang pagkakamali ang naggawa ng mga nagsipagsalin ng Biblia na isalin ang LITERAL na KAHULUGAN nito sa wikang ENGLISH at iba pa. Tama ang ginawa ng mga Judio na pinanatili ang Orihinal nitong anyo sa Wikang Hebreo. Dahil sa ito ay ISANG PANGALAN, at hindi ISANG PANGUNGUSAP.

Ang PELE-JOEZ-EL-GIBBOR-ABI-AD-SAR-SHALOM ay Isang THEOPHORIC NAME na ipinantatawag kay JESUS, tulad ng kaniyang isa pang THEOPHORIC NAME na EMMANUEL, na may LITERAL MEANING na “SUMASAATIN ANG DIYOS”.

Pero hindi nangangahulugan na si Cristo ang Diyos na sumaatin, kundi kahulugan lamang ng kaniyang PANGALAN iyon,  Sapagkat niliwanag ni Cristo iyan:

Juan 8:28-29  “Sinabi nga ni Jesus, Kung maitaas na ninyo ang Anak ng tao, saka ninyo makikilala na ako nga ang Cristo, at WALA AKONG GINAGAWA SA AKING SARILI, KUNDI SINALITA KO ANG MGA BAGAY NA ITO, AYON SA ITINURO SA AKIN NG AMA. AT ANG NAGSUGO SA AKIN AY SUMASA AKIN; hindi niya ako binayaang nagiisa; SAPAGKA'T GINAGAWA KONG LAGI ANG MGA BAGAY NA SA KANIYA'Y NAKALULUGOD.”

Maliwanag kung gayon na ang DIYOS na SUMAATIN ay hindi si Cristo kundi ang AMA na NAGSUGO sa KANIYA.

Kaya nga hindi komo ganun na ang kahulugan ng isang PANGALAN ang ibig sabihin noon ay iyon na rin ang kalagayan nung tinatawag sa PANGALANG iyon.

Kumuha pa tayo ng isa pang halimbawa:

Isaias 8:1  “At sinabi ng Panginoon sa akin, Kumuha ka ng malapad na tabla, at sulatan mo ng panulat ng tao, Kay MAHER-SALALHASH-BAZ;”

Kung isasalin ang MAHER-SALALHASH-BAZ sa English ay MAKE HASTE TO PLUNDER, na sa TAGALOG ay, MAGMADALI UPANG MAKAPANGULIMBAT o MAKAPAGNAKAW.

Kung ating uunawain iyan gaya ng kanilang pagintindi sa ISAIAS 9:6 na dahil sa iyan ang meaning nung pangalan ng ANAK ni ISAIAS hindi ba lalabas niyan na ang ANAK ni Isaias ay isang MAGNANAKAW?

Lagi po nating TATANDAAN na iba ang KAHULUGAN ng PANGALAN sa KALAGAYAN ng taong PINATUTUNGKULAN.

Halimbawa ang pangalan mo ay REX,  ang ibig sabihin niyan ay HARI, Ibig bang sabihin niyan ay Hari ka talaga?

Ang Pangalan mo halimbawa ay ROSARIO na ang ibig sabihin ay BULAKLAK SA ILOG, Ibig bang sabihin noon hindi ka tao at isa kang bulaklak na nasa ilog?

Ganiyan lang naman kasimple unawain iyan eh, nilalabo lamang nila, dahil sa mali nilang pagkaunawa sa ISAIAS 9:6.

Kaya nga pakakatandaan natin na ang PELE-JOEZ-EL-GIBBOR-ABI-AD-SAR-SHALOM ay isang PANGALAN lamang [Theophoric Name] na may kahulugan na:  “KAMANGHAMANGHA, TAGAPAYO, MAKAPANGYARIHANG DIOS, WALANG HANGGANG AMA, PANGULO NG KAPAYAPAAN”.  

Hindi nangangahulugan na kung ano ang ibig sabihin ng PANGALAN ay iyon na rin ang talagang KALAGAYAN ng pinatutungkulan.

Bukod doon niliwanag ng Diyos sa aklat din ni Isaias kung ano ba talaga kalagayan ni Cristo:

Isaias 53:3  “SIYA'Y HINAMAK AT ITINAKUWIL NG MGA TAO; ISANG TAONG SA KAPANGLAWAN, AT BIHASA SA KARAMDAMAN: at gaya ng isa na pinagkublihan ng kanilang mukha ng mga tao, na siya'y hinamak, at hindi natin hinalagahan siya.”

Niliwanag ng Diyos na si Cristo ay:  “ISANG TAONG SA KAPANGLAWAN” Kaya maliwanag na siya ay TAO at ang Diyos mismo ang nagpatunay sa pamamagitan din ni Isaias.

Ano ang katibayan na si Cristo nga ang tinutukoy?

1 Pedro 2:23  “NA, NANG SIYA'Y ALIPUSTAIN, AY HINDI GUMANTI NG PAGALIPUSTA; nang siya'y magbata, ay hindi nagbala; kundi ipinagkatiwala ang kaniyang sarili doon sa humahatol ng matuwid:”

1 Pedro 2:24 “Na siya rin ang nagdala ng ating mga kasalanan sa kaniyang katawan sa ibabaw ng kahoy, upang pagkamatay natin sa mga kasalanan, ay mangabuhay tayo sa katuwiran; na DAHIL SA KANIYANG MGA SUGAT AY NANGAGSIGALING KAYO.”

Kaya nga kung ipipilit na Diyos si Cristo sa Isaias 9:6, ay KOKONTRAHIN nito ang sinabi ng Diyos sa Isaias 53:3 na si Cristo ay TAO.

Maliwanag kung gayon na nagkamali lamang sila ng pagkaunawa sa nasabing talata, na lagi naman nilang ginagawa mapatunayan lang na totoo ang kanilang baluktot na paniniwala na si CRISTO ay TUNAY NA DIYOS.

Nawa ay nakatulong ang sagot nating ito…

156 comments:

  1. Ganda ng paliwana mo bro.nawa maintindihan ito ng bukas ang puso na nagsusuri.

    ReplyDelete
  2. tanong ko po?ano po ba ibig sabihin ng biblia? kasi every sunday kasi dito sa amin sa davao na tinatawag nila CFD na lagi po nilang sinasabi na kaya po hindi nababasa sa biblia dahil po daw kasi ang salitang biblia ay po daw nakasulat sa biblia letra 4 letra kaya po ang lagi nilang rason kaya hindi mabasa sa biblia ang iglesia katolika apostolika romana.ano po ba ibig sabihin ang kung bakit wala po ito sa biblia

    ReplyDelete
  3. Mali ang mga CFD kapatid dahil ang salitang BIBLIA ay mula sa salitang griyego na ang ibig sabihin ay books o mga aklat. Ibig sabihin, kung gusto nilang makita ang salitang biblia eh wag nilang hanapin sa bibliang tagalog o ingles. Dapat ay sa griyego dahil ito ay salitang griyego. Halimbawa yung salitang "sheep" ay hindi makikita sa bibliang tagalog dahil ito ay ingles pero hindi nangangahulugan na walang sheep sa biblia dahil ang katumbas nito sa tagalog ay tupa.

    Ganon din ang biblia dahil ang katumbas nito sa tagalog ay "mga aklat", halimbawa ay ang nakasulat sa Juan 21:25 at Apoc. 20:12; dito ay mababasa natin ang salitang "mga aklat".

    San ba natin dapat hanapin ang salitang "biblia"??
    Basahin natin sa bibliang griego at ganito ang mababasa sa ganoon ding talata:

    Juan 21:25 “εστιν δε και αλλα πολλα ‘οσα εποιησεν ‘ο ιησους ‘ατινα εαν γραφηται καθ ‘εν ουδε αυτον οιμαι τον κοσμον χωρησαι τα γραφομενα βιβλια(Biblia) αμην”

    Apocalypsis 20:12 “και ειδον τους νεκρους μικρους και μεγαλους ‘εστωτας ενωπιον του θεου και βιβλια(Biblia) ηνεωχθησαν και βιβλιον αλλο ηνεωχθη ‘ο εστιν της ζωης και εκριθησαν ‘οι νεκροι εκ των γεγραμμενων εν τοις βιβλιοις κατα τα εργα αυτων”

    Kaya pag may nagsabi na wala daw salitang "biblia" sa biblia ay malaking kamalian yon.

    ReplyDelete
  4. ganda naman dito.. sana marame pang ma ipost na texto...

    ReplyDelete
  5. salamat po kapatid sa pagsagot kung ano ibig sabihin ng bibliya..sana magkaroon ng debate ulit dito sa davao kasi dito sa rizal park ay lagi po tinutuligsa ng mga katoliko ang iglesia ni cristo dinig na dinig po masyado sa maraming tao na sinisiaraan tayo. ito rizal park kasi sa davao ang pinakamarami tao every sunday kasi po malapit kasi dito ang simbahan nila.

    ReplyDelete
  6. mga kapatid. maitanong ko lang po kung ang universe po ba ay tumutukoy sa catholic? ito po kasi ang nirarason nila pagkatinatanong sila kung saan mabasa sa bibliya ang catholic.salamat po sa inyo

    ReplyDelete
  7. Mawalang galang na po kapatid....
    Palagay ko e sobrang mali naman or illogical ang pagsasabi nyo ng "walang tinutukoy sa isaias 9:6 na ang bata ang tinatawag na Makapangyarihang Ama"......edi po ba e kasasabi lang ng malinaw dito?..yung bata ang tinutukoy..bakit kayo umiiwas dito sa katotohanang ito?

    e kung hindi yung bata ang tinutukoy dito e bakit pa isasama ni propeta isaias ang mga katagang "Makapangyarihang Ama"? Gagawin pa nyo tuloy illogical or walang saysay ang pagsasalita ni isaias nyan.

    e kung walang tinutukoy e anong kasaysayan noon? bakit magkakaroon pa ng very specific bible mark to be called as "ISAIAS 9:6" KUNG WALA DIN DUN YUNG TINUTUKOY? gagawin pa nyong illogical prophet si propeta isaias nyan di ba? Pero walang pagsalang mali kayo pag dinagdagan natin ang verse tutal karugtong din naman ito so lets see now..gawin nating isaiah 9:6-8

    Isaiah 9:6-8
    New International Version (NIV)

    6 For to us a child is born,
    to us a son is given,
    and the government will be on his shoulders.
    And he will be called
    Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God,
    Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
    7 Of the greatness of his government and peace
    there will be no end.
    He will reign on David’s throne
    and over his kingdom,
    establishing and upholding it
    with justice and righteousness
    from that time on and forever.
    The zeal of the LORD Almighty
    will accomplish this.
    -- o ngayong napakalinaw na dito na si Kristo ang tinutukoy na Makapangyarihang Ama... wala kayong lusot dyan... wag nyo kasing nililiko ang katotohanan sa pagsunod sa kagustuhan ni Bro Felix..
    besides, anong kasaysayan ng pagsasalita ni isaias kung wala din syang nilalang na pinagpapatungkulan ng kanyang sinasabi dito?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Kung siya ang Makapangyarihang Ama, sino iyong tinutukoy niyang AMA sa Juan 20:17 na ang sabi niya ay "AKING AMA, AT INYONG AMA, AKING DIYOS, AT INYONG DIYOS."?

      Delete
    2. to anonymous: madali nga talaga ang bumasa ng talata pero yong pagkaintindi sa binasang talata ang mahirap ang malinaw na tinutukoy jan na pagka diyos niya o makapangyarihan niya ng batang tinutukoy ay yong nakaatang sa balikat niyang responsibilidad hindi yan tumutukoy sa likas niyang kalagayan dahil ikaw mismo di naniniwalang ipinapanganak ang diyos at kilan hindi naging bata ang diyos magtanong ka lang at magsuri bago ka bumuo ng konklusiyon mo

      Delete
    3. jun patalinhog: sa ibang salin mighty god. si jesus po ang tinutukoy jan.yong sa juan 20:17 sympre ang ama nya genesis 17:1 ANG DIOS AT AMA NI JESUS ANG MAKAPANGYARIHAN sa lahat. kahit si jesus matatawag na dios pro hindi magiging dalawa ang DIOS .MASAHIN NYO.DEU 10:17 SIYANG DIOS ng mga dios, siyang makapangyarihan sa lahat.kaya hindi pwedi dalawa ang makapangyarihan kundi iisa lamang ang amang jehovah.

      Delete
    4. dahan dahan din po sa pagsulat sa nakalagay sa bible.. yung "he will be called" po na tinype niyo ay ang nasa bible po ay, "his name shall be called". Magkaiba po ang kahulugan niyan, pag he will be called yong bata/child ang tinutukoy, pag yong his name shall be called yung pangalan lang po hindi yung bata/child.hindi po ba?

      Delete
  8. Kuya Aerial nabasa ko lang po, Tama po ba ang isinulat na ito ng ating Ministro?
    Ano ba talaga ang Doktrina tungkol dito?

    Pasugo Agosto
    Pahina 16-17
    sinulat ni Benjamin Santiago
    Ang atin bang Panginoong Jesu-Cristo ay tinatawag ding Dios? Tunghayan natin ang hula
    ng propetang Isaias sa 9:6:
    "Sapagka't sa atin ay IPINANGANAK ANG ISANG BATA, sa atin ay ibinigay ang ISANG ANAK
    NA LALAKI; at ang pamamahala ay maatang sa Kanyang balikat; At ang kaniyang pangalan ay
    TATAWAGIN KAMANGHAMANGHA, TAGAPAYO, MAKAPANGYARIHANG DIOS, WALANG HANGGANG AMA, PANGULO NG KAPAYAPAAN'

    Ang batang lalakeng ipinanganak na tinutukoy ni Isaias ay ang ating Panginoong Jesu-Cristo.

    ReplyDelete
  9. sana italakay ninyo rito Filipos 2:6 para maliwanagan ung tito kong born again na mali ang kanilang batayan at hindi nila nauunawaan kung ano ang kahulugan ng talatang ito at ang ano ang nais ipatungkol ni Apostol Pablo..tnx po :)

    ReplyDelete
  10. Totoo ba ang balita na nambugbog ang INC sa mga taga 4th Watch Pentecostal kasi ang sabi ng kaklase kong 4th watch na lagi daw talo ang INC sa mga debate nila at kung matatalo na daw ay binubugbog daw ang mga pastor nila..pakisagot na lang ang aligasyon nila..

    ReplyDelete
  11. Ano dec15, 5.11

    kapatid ang bata nga po ang ipanganganak sa isaias 9.6 pero hindi po ibig sabhin na siya ang makapangyarihang ama kundi ang pangalang ipantatawag sa kanya.

    hindi ibig sabihin na kung ano ang pangalan yun din ang kalagayan.

    anie batungbakal, hindi ibig sabihin na bato at bakal, o di kaya ay macho si anie. ect ganun po yun

    ReplyDelete
  12. Sana magkaroon kayo ng topic about Pentecostal Missionary Church of Christ (4th Watch) na pinagmamalaki nilang mga pahayag na nanalo daw sila sa lahat ng serye ng debate sa INC at walang patotoo daw sa paninindigan ang INC.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Peter of Las Pinas6 March 2012 at 10:53

      Alam mo kung totoo ang mga pinagsasabi ng mga Pentecostal na iyan, de sana inilathala nila iyan sa pahayagan, ipinalabas nila sa TV. O kaya ay sa Radyo man lang at nang maipakita sa lahat ng tao na talagang nailampaso nila INC sa debate.

      Eh ang kaso lang, ni walang kabalita-balita, ni alimuom wala tayong masagap na totoo iyang mga ipinamamalita nilang iyan.

      Hehehehehe

      Delete
  13. "Kaya nga ang banggit ay ANG KANIYANG PANGALAN at hindi sinabi na ANG KANIYANG MGA PANGALAN, dahil ang PELE-JOEZ-EL-GIBBOR-ABI-AD-SAR-SHALOM, ay ISANG MAHABANG PANGALAN LAMANG, wala itong tuldok ni kuwit sa pagitan."

    I prefer His Nickname... "Emmanuel" ... "God with us"...
    much shorter... :)

    ReplyDelete
  14. "Kaya nga hindi komo ganun na ang kahulugan ng isang PANGALAN ang ibig sabihin noon ay iyon na rin ang kalagayan nung tinatawag sa PANGALANG iyon."

    Yes.. But when God himself gives the Name.. it is!!.. Remember Abram and Jacob....
    The Name Jesus, as given to the Messiah, was not an ordinary naming of a child given by parents... it came from God.... :)

    ReplyDelete
  15. The Real Meaning of Isaiah 9:6:

    Isaiah 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

    "Unto us a child is born.. a son is given"... past tense, already done, established!.. sound more like Jesus...

    John 8:58 Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.
    >> not on a physical birth, but His birth and sufferings in the mind of God (1Peter 1:20)

    "government be upon his shoulder"... (1Peter 3:22)

    1Peter 3:22 Who is gone into heaven, and is on the right hand of God; angels and authorities and powers being made subject unto him.

    "and his name shall be called"... what is the name of the child?
    >> Jesus...and what is the meaning of the name Jesus in Theophory?

    Yehoshua (Joshua, Jesus) – Yahweh saves, Yahweh is Savour, Yahweh is my Salvation..

    So if the meaning of the name Jesus is "YHWH saves", then "PELE-JOEZ-EL-GIBBOR-ABI-AD-SAR-SHALOM" is not the other meaning of it ..but a "Title"

    Ex: Dan Fernandez, he is a congressman, a father, a son of his parents, a great political leader, a good husband...etc..
    >> that is title....

    Theophory is an act of imbedding a name of God to a child as chosen by a couple... "PELE-JOEZ-EL-GIBBOR-ABI-AD-SAR-SHALOM" was not dictated by human so it is not a theophony, it is a title...
    >> when parents choose to name their child "John" (knowing what it means) they just want to express the kindness of God in their lives, a mere thanks, nothing more...

    Name Jacob changed Israel is not a Theophory as an act but rather the assurance of His promises.. (The Prince of God).. like Abram.

    "The Mighty God"... not new, Thomas called Him God, even found in 1Timothy 3:16, Titus 2:13... even Stephen cried out to Him..

    Numbers 23:19 "God is not a man, that he should lie;" it is true that He is not man, but He does manifest in any form as He will..

    "The Everlasting Father"... the everlasting Father was standing right before their eyes...

    John 14:7 If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.
    >> Jesus said they have already seen Him...

    John 14:8 Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us.
    >> Philip wants to put an end to any doubts.. But Jesus comforted them with this words...

    John 14:9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?

    Micah 5:2 But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.

    Isaiah 9:6 reveals the nature of the coming Messiah, not a mere name....

    ReplyDelete
  16. Peter of Las Pinas6 March 2012 at 11:21

    Matagal nang sinagot ng INC ang lahat ng isyu, mga batikos at mga pagtutol ng kahit na sino man tungkol sa ARAL ng INC, tungkol sa pagkakaroon ng IISANG DIOS lamang ang AMA, at si Cristo Bilang Panginoon ay TAONG TAGAPAMAGITAN.

    Kaya wala namang bago sa mga pamamaraang kanilang ginagamit para patunayan na totoo ang ARAL na iyan na kaya lamang umiral ay dahil sa inimbento ng Simbahang Katoliko, at ginawa nilang DIYOS si Cristo, Noong panahon ng namamayaning Imperyo Romano.

    Gaya ng pangangatuwiran ni ACTS of LAGUNA,

    Sabi niya:

    "The Everlasting Father"... the everlasting Father was standing right before their eyes...

    John 14:7 If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.
    >> Jesus said they have already seen Him...



    May sinabi ba si Cristo na siya ang AMA? Itinuro ba ng mga Apostol na si Cristo ang AMA sa kabila ng sinabi niya ang mga pananalitang iyan?

    Kumpletohin natin ang mga talata at nang ating makita ang talagang ibig sabihin ni Cristo kung bakit niya sinabi iyan:

    Juan 14:7 “Kung ako'y nangakilala ninyo ay mangakikilala ninyo ang aking Ama: buhat ngayon siya'y inyong mangakikilala, at siya'y inyong nakita.”

    Juan 14:8 “Sinabi sa kaniya ni Felipe, Panginoon, ipakita mo sa amin ang Ama, at sukat na ito sa amin.”

    Juan 14:9 “Sinabi sa kaniya ni Jesus, Malaon nang panahong ako'y inyong kasama, at hindi mo ako nakikilala, Felipe? ang nakakita sa akin ay nakakita sa Ama; paanong sinasabi mo, Ipakita mo sa amin ang Ama?”

    Juan 14:10 “HINDI KA BAGA NANANAMPALATAYA NA AKO'Y NASA AMA, AT ANG AMA AY NASA AKIN? ANG MGA SALITANG AKING SINASABI SA INYO'Y HINDI KO SINASALITA SA AKING SARILI: KUNDI ANG AMA NA TUMATAHAN SA AKIN AY GUMAGAWA NG KANIYANG MGA GAWA.”

    Juan 14:11 “Magsisampalataya kayo sa akin na ako'y nasa Ama, at ang Ama ay nasa akin: o kungdi kaya'y magsisampalataya kayo sa akin DAHIL SA MGA GAWA RIN.”


    Maliwanag na ipinaliwanag ni Cristo kung bakit niya sinabi na ang nakakita sa kaniya ay nakakita sa AMA, ang ibig sabihin lamang noon, ang MGA GAWA ng AMA na SUMASAKANIYA kapag kanilang nakita ay katumbas noon nakita nila ang AMA sa pamamagitan ni Cristo, dahil ang AMA ay gumagawa ng kaniyang mga gawa sa PAMAMAGITAN ni CRISTO. Kinakasangkapan siya ng Diyos upang gawin ang Kaniyang mga kalooban.

    Baka sabihin mo naman ACTS OF LAGUNA, Na kaya siya Diyos ay dahil sa TUMATAHAN sa kaniya o SUMASAKANIYA ang DIYOS.

    Aba’y LALABAS niyan DADAMI ang DIYOS. Bakit?

    1 Juan 4:15 “Ang sinomang nagpapahayag na si Jesus ay Anak ng Dios, ANG DIOS AY NANANAHAN SA KANIYA, at siya'y sa Dios.”

    1 Juan 4:12 Sinoman ay hindi nakakita kailan man sa Dios: kung tayo'y nangagiibigan, ANG DIOS AY NANANAHAN SA ATIN, at ang kaniyang pagibig ay nagiging sakdal sa atin:”

    Napakaliwanag na hindi lamang si CRISTO ang puwedeng PANAHANAN ng Diyos, sinoman ayon sa Biblia na pasado sa sinasabi ng mga talatang iyan, ANG DIYOS AY SASAKANIYA o MANANAHAN sa KANIYA.

    Kaya kung ipagpipilitan, LALABAS DARAMI ANG DIOS hindi lang si CRISTO…

    Kay liwa-liwanag ng talata, NILALABO lang ng mga TAO na malawak ang IMAHINASYON, at malikot ang PAG-IISIP.

    ReplyDelete
  17. ACTS of Laguna6 March 2012 at 12:56

    Peter.. There is only one God and that God manifest in the flesh..

    1Timothy 3:16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

    ....... :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Peter of Las Pinas6 March 2012 at 15:17

      @Acts of Laguna

      Narito ang paliwanag ng PASUGO na may kinalaman sa nasabing isyu:

      -------------------------
      I Timoteo 3:16

      “And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.”


      [At walang pagtatalo, dakila ang hiwaga ng kabanalan: Ang Diyos ay nahayag sa laman, pinapaging-banal sa Espiritu, nakita ng mga anghel, ipinangaral sa mga Gentil, sinampalatayanan sa sanlibutan, tinanggap sa itaas sa kaluwalhatian.] (KJV)

      Inuunawa ng iba ang talatang ito na si Cristo raw ay Diyos na nagkatawang-tao. Tama kaya ang pagkaunawang ito? Tunghayan natin ang pahayag ng mga nagsuri sa talatang ito. Ayon sa The International Bible Commentary, ang salitang “Diyos” sa mga katagang “Ang Diyos ay nahayag sa laman” na siyang pagkakaliwat sa King James Version ay mali. Ang dapat daw na ginamit ay ang panghalip na “Siya” sa halip na ang salitang “Diyos”:

      “By the pronoun ‘He’ with which the hymn opens, is to be understood, Christ. The Greek reading which underlies the AV translation ‘God’ is almost certainly wrong …” (Bruce, F.F., General Editor. The International Bible Commentary. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1986.)

      Sa Filipino:

      “Ang panghalip na ‘Siya’ kung saan ang himno ay nagsisimula, ay dapat unawaing tumutukoy kay Cristo. Ang pagbasang Griyego na pinagbabatayan ng salin sa AV [Authorized o King James Version] na ‘Diyos’ ay halos tiyak na mali …” (p. 1479)

      Ganito rin halos ang sinasabi sa iba’t ibang komentaryo ng Biblia:

      “3:16 THE EARLIEST GREEK TEXTS HAVE ‘HE’ RATHER THAN ‘GOD’. The six phrases which follow appear to be a quotation from an early Christian hymn…” (Criswell, W. A., Ph.D., ed. The Criswell Study Bible. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, Pubs., 1979.)

      Sa Filipino:

      “3:16 Ang pinakamatatandang tekstong Griyego ay nagsasaad ng ‘Siya’ sa halip na ‘Diyos’. Ang sumusunod na anim na parirala ay tila sinipi mula sa isang matandang himnong Cristiano …” (The Criswell Study Bible, footnote)

      Narito pa ang isa:

      “… The best manuscripts read, ‘Who’, referring to Christ. He was justified by the way the Spirit worked in him.” (The Westminster Study Edition of the Holy Bible. Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1968.)

      Sa Filipino:

      “… Sa pinakamahuhusay na manuskrito ay mababasang ‘Siya’, na tumutukoy kay Cristo. Siya ay pinapaging-banal sa pamamagitan ng paraan ng paggawa sa kaniya ng Espiritu.” (The Westminster Study Edition of the Holy Bible, footnote)8

      Malinaw sa maraming patotoo na sinipi natin mula sa mga iskolar ng Biblia na hindi dapat pagbatayan ang I Timoteo 3:16 sa paniniwalang si Cristo ay Diyos na nagkatawang-tao.

      Delete
    2. Peter of Las Pinas6 March 2012 at 15:19

      Ayon kay John Wycliffe, ang salitang “siya” sa I Timoteo 3:16 ay tumutukoy kay Cristo at ang salitang “laman” ay tumutukoy sa pagiging tao ni Cristo. Tunghayan natin ang kaniyang pahayag:

      “The context makes it plain that Paul is referring to Christ when he says: He who was manifest in the flesh (ASV) … All the leading words occur elsewhere in Paul’s writings. Flesh. Paul frequently emphasizes the humanity of Christ by the use of this word (Rom 1:3; 8:3; 9:5; Eph 5:15; Col 1:22; Heb 5:7; 10:20)…” (Pfeiffer, Charles F. and Everett F. Harrison, eds. The Wycliffe Bible Commentary. Chicago: Moody Press, 1990.)

      Sa Filipino:

      “… Ang konteksto ay malinaw na nagpapakita na ang tinutukoy ni Pablo ay si Cristo kapag sinasabi niyang: Siya na nahayag sa laman (ASV) [American Standard Version] … Lahat ng pangunahing salita ay nauulit sa ibang mga sulat ni Pablo. Laman. Madalas na binibigyang-diin ni Pablo ang pagkatao ni Cristo sa pamamagitan ng paggamit ng salitang ito (Roma 1:3; 8:3; 9:5; Efe. 5:15; Col. 1:22; Heb. 5:7; 10:20)…” (The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, p. 1375)

      Tunay na si Cristo ay nagtaglay ng mga katangiang di taglay ng ibang tao (Gawa 2:36; 5:31; I Tim. 2:5; Efe. 1:20-22; Filip. 2:9-11) subalit, nananatili ang katotohanang tao ang Kaniyang likas na kalagayan at hindi Siya ang tunay na Diyos (Juan 8:40; I Tim. 2:5; Mat. 1:20; Ose. 11:9; Ezek. 28:2). At gaya ng ating napatunayan sa ating pagsusuring ito, mismong mga iskolar na mula sa mga samahang nagtataguyod ng aral na si Cristo’y Diyos ang nagsasabing ang mga talatang diumano’y nagpapatunay sa pagiging-Diyos ni Cristo ay hindi sang-ayon sa Biblia at, kung gayon, ay hindi wastong gamiting batayan sa pagtuturo ng gayong maling paniniwala.

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

      Maling salin ang 1 Timoteo 3:16 ng KJV:
      Ang tamang salin ay ang nasa ASV:

      1 Tim 3:16 “And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness; HE WHO WAS MANIFESTED IN THE FLESH, Justified in the spirit, Seen of angels, Preached among the nations, Believed on in the world, Received up in glory.” [American Standard Version]

      Dahil sa si Cristo ang nahayag sa LAMAN, at hindi ang DIYOS…

      1 Juan 4:2 “Dito'y nakikilala ninyo ang Espiritu ng Dios: ang bawa't espiritung nagpapahayag na SI JESUCRISTO AY NAPARITONG NASA LAMAN ay sa Dios:”

      Pero natural sa kabila ng mga ebidensiyang iyan alam ko, ang ipagpipilitan mo parin ay ang mali mong paniniwala na DIOS SI CRISTO.

      Delete
  18. ACTS of Laguna6 March 2012 at 18:40

    1Timothy 3:16 και ομολογουμενως μεγα εστι το της ευσεβειας μυστηριον "θεος" εφανερωθη εν σαρκι εδικαιωθη εν πνευματι ωφθη αγγελοις εκηρυχθη εν εθνεσιν επιστευθη εν κοσμω ανεληφθη εν δοξη.

    >> The Greek word is "Theos", not "He".... same with King James.
    >> "Who" in Greek is "ος".. some scholar think that it was edited, but still the Bible will not let that happen.

    Matthew 1:23 Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, And they shall call his name Immanuel; which is, being interpreted, God with us.
    .... :)

    ReplyDelete
  19. Peter of Las Pinas7 March 2012 at 11:46

    Was that the original Greek you're showing?

    Can you prove to me that the Greek that you just quoted is actually taken from the original manuscript and it was actually written by the Apostles?

    The original manuscript was written in KOINE GREEK, iyang ipinapakita mo kaibigan ay MODERN GREEK na.

    Come on, you are not a Greek nor a Bible Scholar yourself, Bakit hindi mo ba nabasa na ang mga nagsasabi na ang nakalagay sa Earliest Greek Manuscript ay mga naniniwala rin na Diyos si Cristo? Hindi naman mga INC ang sumulat ng mga libro na sinipi ng Pasugo ah?

    Bakit hindi mo sila i-back ground check para malaman mo kung ano paniniwala nila kay Cristo?

    Hindi sila BIAS, they are just telling the TRUTH, Baka hindi mo alam na hindi lang iyan ang verse sa KJV na mali ang salin?

    Bakit ang nagtranslate ba ng American Standard Version ay hindi naniniwala na Diyos si Cristo?

    Tingnan mo kung paano isinalin iyan sa masasabing pinaka lumang Bibliang tagalog natin?:

    1 Tim 3:16 “At walang pagtatalo, dakila ang hiwaga ng kabanalan; YAONG NAHAYAG SA LAMAN, Pinapaging-banal sa espiritu, Nakita ng mga anghel, Ipinangaral sa mga bansa, Sinampalatayanan sa sanglibutan, Tinanggap sa itaas sa kaluwalhatian.” [Ang Biblia, 1905]

    Kita mo sa tagalog wala iyong salitang Diyos o “THEOS” sa Greek?

    Ang nagsalin ba ng Bibliang iyan hindi naniniwala na Diyos si Cristo? Ano motibo ng mga iyan, bakit nila iyan binago kung talagang “Diyos” ang nakalagay diyan?

    Ang akala mo siguro iisa lang ang version ng GREEK BIBLE, ang sinipi mo ay mula sa TEXTUS RECEPTUS ang sisipiin ko naman ay mula sa TISCHENDORF, tingnan mo nakalagay:

    1 Tim 3:16 “καὶ ὁμολογουμένως μέγα ἐστὶν τὸ τῆς εὐσεβείας μυστήριον· ὃς ἐφανερώθη ἐν σαρκί, ἐδικαιώθη ἐν πνεύματι, ὤφθη ἀγγέλοις, ἐκηρύχθη ἐν ἔθνεσιν, ἐπιστεύθη ἐν κόσμῳ, ἀνελήμφθη ἐν δόξῃ.” [Tischendorf’s Greek New Testament]

    Oh hayan nakalagay diyan ang hinahanap mong ὃς o “HE” at kitang-kita na hindi salitang θεός “theos” o Diyos, na gaya ng sinipi mong Greek Bible.

    Ang tischendorf ay batay sa manuscritong mas nauna pa sa ginamit o pinagbatayan ng TEXTUS RECEPTUS na sinipi mo, at maraming nakatuklas na iyan ang TAMA, kaya maraming nagsalin ng Biblia na bagamat naniniwala rin na Diyos si Cristo ay hindi naatim na hindi maitama ang nasabing talata.

    Kung ang Bibliang Tagalog at Bibliang English ay maraming version, aba’y ang Greek Bible ay ganoon din, pinatutunayan ng mga Iskolar na sinaunang manuskrito sa 1 Timoteo 3:16 ay wala ang salitang Diyos THEOS kundi ang salitang OS o “He”.

    Kaya useless lang ang pangangatuwiran mo kaibigan…ipinapahalata mo lang na mahina ang pundasyon mo sa isyung ito.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Peter of Las Pinas7 March 2012 at 12:28

      Now you give this verse as your back-up proof:

      Matthew 1:23 “Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, And they shall call his name Immanuel; which is, being interpreted, God with us.”

      The verse does not suggests that Jesus is being mentioned as “GOD WITH US” it is just telling that that is the meaning of His Theophorical Name.

      Immanuel or Emmanuel, ang ibig sabihin GOD WITH US. Sumasaatin ang Diyos.

      Meaning lang iyan nung Pangalang Immanuel:

      Matthew 1:23 "A virgin will have a baby boy, and HE WILL BE CALLED IMMANUEL," WHICH MEANS "GOD IS WITH US." [CEV]

      Sinabi lang iyong meaning nung NAME, at hindi sinabing si Cristo ang Diyos na sumasaatin. Konklusiyon niyo lang iyon at wala sa talata.

      Magkagayon man, hindi si Cristo ang Diyos na sasaatin kundi ang Ama, dahil sa pamamagitan ni Cristo sasaatin ang Diyos Ama:

      Juan 12:49 “Sapagka't ako'y hindi nagsasalita na mula sa aking sarili; kundi ang Ama na sa akin ay nagsugo, ay siyang nagbigay sa akin ng utos, kung ano ang dapat kong sabihin, at kung ano ang dapat kong salitain.”

      Juan 14:10 “Hindi ka baga nananampalataya na ako'y nasa Ama, at ang Ama ay nasa akin? ang mga salitang aking sinasabi sa inyo'y hindi ko sinasalita sa aking sarili: kundi ang Ama na tumatahan sa akin ay gumagawa ng kaniyang mga gawa.”


      Dahil ang mga salita at gawa ni Cristo ay gawa ng Ama na ipinagagawa at iniutos ng Diyos na gawin niya at hindi kaniyang sariling kalooban, kaya katumbas noon sumasaatin ang Diyos, dahil ang mga gawa ni Cristo ay gawa ng Ama, at sa pamamagitan ni Cristo makikilala natin at makikita ang Diyos.

      Na iyon naman talaga ang misyon niya, ang ipakilala ang AMA:

      Juan 17:25-16 “Oh Amang banal, hindi ka nakikilala ng sanglibutan, nguni't nakikilala kita; at nakikilala ng mga ito na ikaw ang nagsugo sa akin; AT IPINAKILALA KO SA KANILA ANG IYONG PANGALAN, AT IPAKIKILALA KO; upang ang pagibig na sa akin ay iniibig mo ay mapasa kanila, at ako'y sa kanila.”

      At paano natin dapat kilalanin si Cristo?

      Juan 17:21 “Upang silang lahat ay maging isa; na gaya mo, Ama, sa akin, at ako'y sa iyo, na sila nama'y suma atin: UPANG ANG SANGLIBUTAN AY SUMAMPALATAYA NA AKO'Y SINUGO MO.”

      Ganiyan natin dapat kilalanin at sampalatayanan si Cristo, bilang SINUGO ng Diyos, kay liwa-liwanag, hindi ba?

      Delete
    2. Peter of Las Pinas7 March 2012 at 12:34

      Dagdag pa diyan hindi mo ba nabasa sa Mateo1:23 na si Cristo ay ipinanganak?

      Eh puwede bang maging ANAK ng TAO o ipanganak ang Diyos?

      Bilang 23:19 “ANG DIOS AY HINDI TAO na magsisinungaling, NI ANAK NG TAO na magsisisi; Sinabi ba niya, at hindi niya gagawin? O sinalita ba niya, at hindi niya isasagawa?”

      Ang Diyos ay hindi TAO, at lalong hindi siya ANAK ng TAO…

      Ganiyan ipinakilala ng Diyos ang kaniyang sarili bilang Diyos, at ganiyan niya sinabi ang pagkakaiba niya sa TAO. Sa Biblia kapag sinabing Diyos hindi TAO, hindi ANAK ng TAO. Walang DUAL NATURE, Pag sinabing Diyos iyan ay Diyos, pag sinabing TAO iyan ay TAO, walang DIYOS NA TAO, at walang TAONG DIYOS. Paniniwalang pagano iyan.

      Kasi kung ang ANAK ay Diyos na naging TAO, Ilan ang Diyos? Ang AMA ay Diyos, tapos ang ANAK ay Diyos din, aba’y hindi ba lalabas na DALAWA ang Diyos?

      Ngayon kung ipagpipilitan mo naman at sasabihin mo, IISA LANG ANG DIYOS, at siya rin iyong nagkatawang tao, eh ganito ngayon ang malaking tanong:

      Kung ang Diyos ay nagkatwang tao at bumaba sa lupa, samakatuwid ang Diyos ay nasa Lupa at wala sa Langit, eh sino iyong tinatawag ni Cristong Ama habang nakatingala siya sa Langit? At sino iyong sumasagot sa kaniya kung ang Diyos pala ay nasa Lupa na nga at nagkatawang-tao na?

      Hindi ba kay laking problema?

      Napakatibay ng aral ng INC, tungkol sa IISANG DIYOS NA TUNAY na walang iba kundi ang AMA[Juan 17:1,3], at si Cristo ay TAONG TAGAPAMAGITAN [1 Tim 2:5]

      Kaya sorry ka na lang kaibigan, dahil marami nang nagtangka sa INC sa isyu na iyan…at lahat ng talatang ginagamit ninyo para patunayang Diyos si Cristo ay nasagot nang lahat iyan, magmula pa noon sa pangangaral pa ng Ka Felix.

      Wala ka bang bagong verse o pangangatuwiran? Iyong hindi ginamit ng mga Katoliko at mga Protestante? Sige nga tingnan nga natin kung may maipapakita ka? Hehehehe

      Delete
  20. ACTS of Laguna8 March 2012 at 04:38

    Peter... regarding 1Timothy 3:16, even if CODEX SINAITICUS (TISCHENDORF)is older than TEXTUS RECEPTUS, It doesn't mean that it is more reliable? (I'm not against any translation, please keep that in mind. It just happen that we are digging deeper... :)

    Do you know how many TISCHENDORF versus TEXTUS RECEPTUS in existence out of 5000+ available manuscript?

    You said:
    Can you prove to me that the Greek that you just quoted is actually taken from the original manuscript and it was actually written by the Apostles?
    > I believe you can answer it yourself. And friend, if you tell me that the one you quoted is written by the apostles themselves then this discussion is over.

    You said:
    Bakit hindi mo sila i-back ground check para malaman mo kung ano paniniwala nila kay Cristo?
    > Friend, for KJV (which translate it as "God") are not bias.
    > Other translation with "He who" translation are also not bias.
    > So there is no question of who translate it into English.

    Since our discussion is going toward the deity of Christ.. can you answer my query in "Why Jesus Christ can't be God". Let's discuss further there... :)

    Going back to our topic: Isaiah 9:6

    Friend, I refute Aerial' understanding of Isaiah 9:6 which he explicitly said that it is a long name rather than a title. Can you support his argument?

    As I have said: Isaiah 9:6 reveals the nature of the coming Messiah, not a mere name....

    Regards... :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. salamat sa mga katutuhanang aral na inihahayag ng Iglesi Ni Cristo kaibigang acts of laguna...unti unting nagkakaroon ng linaw sayong isipan ang bawat tuligsa at katanungan mo... pahayag lang nito na unti unting tinatamnan ka na rin ng katutuhanan... kasamaang palad nga lang napakahirap mong tanggapin.... magparaya ka lang sayong sarili kaibigan tingnan mo i ga guide ka pang lalo sa katutuhanan, na kahit anong gawin mong balubaluktutin at iligaw ang mga Iglesiya Ni Cristo sa mga tuligsa mo... buong linaw parin nilang sinasagot nang buong giting na walang alinlangan at salungatan, na kanilang sinasagot ang lahat mong tuligsa at katanungn na naaayon lamang sa aral ng banal na kasulatan, kung sa pananampalataya lang acts of laguna ay ikinatanda ko na at matigas pa sa bato ang pagkapulido ko bilang KATOLIKOng tulad mong may iisang diyos na tatlo( pano kaya nangyari yon di rin kayang sagutin ng mga paring mga kasamahan ko sa pagmimisa na ang sagot lang sa akin ay misteryo at si cristo ay dinidiyos)mula pagkabata sakristan ako na araw araw pari ang kasama ngunit salamat sa IGLESIA NI CRISTO sa awa ng Diyos narating ko ang tunay na IGLESIA...sigi pa ACTS Of LAGUNA tuloy mo lang ang tuligsa at pagtatanong sa mga INC sa gayong paraan mauunawa mo ang katutuhan....... salamat sa INC more power

      Delete
  21. Peter of Las Pinas9 March 2012 at 13:07

    @ Acts of Laguna,

    Well it was the verse itself who said that it is a NAME.

    Isaiah 9:6 “For a child is born unto us, a son is given unto us; and the government is upon his shoulder; and his NAME is called PELE- JOEZ-EL-GIBBOR-ABI-AD-SAR-SHALOM;”

    Well I cannot stop you from being an ANTI-BIBLE, if that’s what you like by not accepting what that verse had said. There is always someone to be in the dark side to balance the equation of good and evil, ika nga.

    The NAME’s MEANING of someone does not necessarily mean that it denotes the bearer’s NATURE.

    But if we accept your argument, it would appear that JESUS is MIGHTY GOD and EVERLASTING FATHER, right?

    So if Jesus Christ is the MIGHTY GOD and the EVERLASTING FATHER, as you understood Isaiah 9:6, how many MIGHTY GODS and EVERLASTING FATHERS do you have?

    Ah alam, ko na, hindi kaya kopya na naman sa Jehovah’s Witnesses ang paniniwala mo tungkol sa Diyos, kasi favorite din nilang gamitin ang verse na iyan eh, si JEHOVAH daw ang ALMIGHTY GOD, at si JESUS naman daw ang MIGHTY GOD, Kaya para sa kanila DALAWA ang DIYOS, ganiyan ba paniniwala mo kaibigan?

    What the Bible said?

    Isaiah 43:10 "People of Israel, you are my witnesses; I chose you to be my servant, so that you would know me and believe in me and understand that I AM THE ONLY GOD. BESIDES ME THERE IS NO OTHER GOD; THERE NEVER WAS AND NEVER WILL BE.” [Good News]

    No other God but one, at all times, and who is this God?

    Isaiah 63:16 “YOU ARE OUR FATHER. Even though Abraham doesn't know us and Israel doesn't pay attention to us, O LORD, YOU ARE OUR FATHER. Your name is our Defender From Everlasting. [God’s Words Version]

    And how many FATHER do we have?

    Malachi 2:10 “DON'T YOU KNOW THAT WE ALL HAVE GOD AS OUR FATHER? DIDN'T THE ONE GOD CREATE EACH OF US? Then why do you cheat each other by breaking the agreement God made with your ancestors?” [CEV]

    If you insist that Jesus Christ is the God who manifested in the flesh or he is a GOD who became human, answer this questions:

    1. Do you believe that verses will contradict each other?

    2. Where is God when Jesus Christ became MAN and came down on EARTH?

    3. Where is the EVERLASTING FATHER when Jesus Christ was on earth?

    4. How many TRUE GODS are there?

    5. And who is the God Jesus Christ was calling when he said “MY GOD, MY GOD, WHY HAVE YOU FORSAKEN ME?”

    And before I forgot, the Old testament have revealed the true nature of the Messiah:

    Psalm 80:17 “Let Your hand be on THE MAN OF YOUR RIGHT HAND, on the Son of man whom You have made strong for Yourself.” [Modern King James Version]

    And who is the MAN OF THE RIGHT HAND OF GOD?

    Colosians 3:1 “If then you were raised with Christ, seek those things which are above, WHERE CHRIST IS SITTING AT THE RIGHT HAND OF GOD.” [MKJV]

    Jesus Christ is the MAN OF THE RIGHT HAND OF GOD, and likewise, the New Testament, proved that he is a MAN:

    Hebrews 10:12 “BUT THIS MAN, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, SAT DOWN ON THE RIGHT HAND OF GOD; [KJV]

    Only an Anti-Bible would say that the Bible was lying and should say that JESUS IS A GOD SITTING IN THE RIGHT HAND OF GOD.

    I guess no one would like to be an Anti-Bible, right Acts of Laguna?

    ReplyDelete
  22. Peter of Las Pinas9 March 2012 at 13:33

    Acts of Laguna you said:

    Can you prove to me that the Greek that you just quoted is actually taken from the original manuscript and it was actually written by the Apostles?
    > I believe you can answer it yourself. And friend, if you tell me that the one you quoted is written by the apostles themselves then this discussion is over.


    I didn’t said that the TISCHENDORF is the ORIGINAL or the actual manuscript that was written by the Apostles themselves.

    You even said:

    Do you know how many TISCHENDORF versus TEXTUS RECEPTUS in existence out of 5000+ available manuscript?

    So to you MAJORITY WINS? That is the basis of your TRUTH?

    Have you ever checked the Bible, and find out how many will go to hell? Are those people who will be saved in Judgment day the MAJORITY in numbers, or those who will go to hell?

    During the Ancient times, how many believed that the EARTH is FLAT and not ROUND?

    Almost all human beings during that time believed that the world was flat, but are they right and what they believed is the truth?

    So which is which then?

    It was clearly stated by one of the Book that I cited that:

    “By the pronoun ‘He’ with which the hymn opens, is to be understood, Christ. THE GREEK READING WHICH UNDERLIES THE AV [Authorized Version or KJV] TRANSLATION ‘GOD’ IS ALMOST CERTAINLY WRONG …” (Bruce, F.F., General Editor. The International Bible Commentary. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1986.)

    Why the translation God is certainly WRONG?

    “3:16 THE EARLIEST GREEK TEXTS HAVE ‘HE’ RATHER THAN ‘GOD’. The six phrases which follow appear to be a quotation from an early Christian hymn…” (Criswell, W. A., Ph.D., ed. The Criswell Study Bible. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, Pubs., 1979.)

    It was not people who do not believe that Jesus Christ is God, who actually said that. He said

    “THE EARLIEST GREEK TEXTS HAVE ‘HE’ RATHER THAN ‘GOD’”

    You and the author of that book shared the same beliefs and yet he said that. Would you mind telling me what is his motive, a person who believed that Jesus is God, would dare to say that where he could say otherwise?

    ReplyDelete
  23. Peter of Las Pinas9 March 2012 at 13:34

    PLEASE READ THIS CAREFULLY…

    If you want to dig deeper, you should have considered also the HISTORY OF THE DOCTRINE OF THE DEITY OF CHRIST, from which I am sure that your religion definitely is not the one who originally taught this in the first place.

    That’s why we are not going to ask your religion about its history, dahil hindi naman kayo ang original ng aral na iyan.

    All religions who believed that Jesus Christ is God, just followed the teachings of the one who invented this doctrine in the first place.

    It was the CATHOLIC CHURCH who formulated or invented that doctrine, and the PROTESTANTS just followed the Catholic Church in this belief, and the others copied and copied it until today. Because since majority of professing Christians were Catholics, it became a common beliefs among billions of people in the world.

    Kaya nga sabi ng iba, bakit iiba ka pa, eh yun ang paniniwala ng mas nakararami eh.

    Why? Was it the number of people who believed in a certain belief the basis that what they believed is the TRUTH?

    What is the truth behind this doctrine?

    Look at what they say about the Original beliefs of the early Christians about Jesus:

    “…The apostles and EARLY CHRISTIANS DID NOT EXPERIENCE JESUS AS A GOD IN HUMAN DISGUISE OR AS GOD PRETENDING TO BE HUMAN (this is one reason that the early Church rejected fanciful and wildly imaginative accounts of Jesus’ life) THEY EXPERIENCE HIM AS A HUMAN. He was so real in his life, so genuinely human in his spirit, and so convincing in his words that they believed in him. They felt that whatever human life really was, Jesus as a person expressed that life.” [The Emerging Church, by Rev Ronald J. Wilkins, page 29]

    The Catholic Church admited that they only assembled or formulated that doctrine:

    “Ipinahahayag ng ilang dalubhasa na utay-utay na binalangkas ng Simbahan [Katoliko] ang pananampalataya sa PAGKA-DIYOS NI JESUS sa impluho ng ibang relihiyon.” [At Nagsalita Ang Diyos sa Pamamagitan ng Anak, sinulat ng Paring si Pedro Sevilla, page 181]

    In English:
    “Some experts say that the belief in the DEITY OF CHRIST was little by little formulated by the [Catholic] Church in the influence of other religions.”

    And which other religions influenced the Catholic Church in the formulation of the doctrine?

    “It was when Christianity spread out into PAGAN WORLD that THE IDEA OF JESUS AS A SAVIOR GOD EMERGED.” [The Meaning of the Dead Sea Scrolls, page 90]

    It was the PAGAN RELIGIONS who influenced the Catholic Church in the formulation of Jesus is God doctrine.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Peter of Las Pinas9 March 2012 at 13:38

    So when is that?

    “…THE DOCTRINE THAT JESUS HAD BEEN GOD IN HUMAN FORM WAS NOT FINALIZED UNTIL THE FOURTH CENTURY. The development of Christian belief in the Incarnation was a gradual, complex process. Jesus himself certainly never claims to be God.” [A History of God: The 4000-Year Quest of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, page 81]

    What year is that in the 4th Century?

    "Thus, for example, it was not until 325 A.D., at the Council of Nicaea, that the [Catholic] church defined for us that it was an article of faith that Jesus is truly God." [Discourses in the Apostles’ Creed, by Rev Clement H. Crock, page 206]

    It was clear that only in the year 325 A.D., at the COUNCIL OF NICEA, for the first time the Catholic Church declared in the Council that it was an ARTICLE OF FAITH that Jesus was TRULY GOD.

    All The Apostles were already dead, Jesus Christ was already in heaven, and the Bible was already completed, there was no doctrine of the DIETY OF CHRIST in the first 3 Centuries and it only appeared in the 4th Century, in 325 A.D.

    One Historian admit that the EARLY CHRISTIANS do not have a doctrine regarding the DEITY of CHRIST.

    We read the Gospels and the book of Acts in the light of our understanding of the pre-existence and the incarnation of God the Son. However, THE EARLY CHRISTIANS HAD NO SUCH CONCEPTS IN THEIR MINDS. THEY HAD NO DOCTRINE OF THE DEITY OF CHRIST.” [The Young Church: Acts of the Apostles, page 48]

    Jesus is God, is just a doctrine invented by the Catholic Church, but how they were able to propagate this doctrine though it is not the truth, what sort of actions does the church had done just to make sure that they will accept this newly invented teaching?

    “Once this “Nicene Creed” had been publicly signed by all the bishops and promulgated by
    Constantine, it became the official creed for all Christians. TO DENY THE DIVINITY OF CHRIST IN ANY WAY WAS TO PUT ONESELF OUTSIDE THE CHRISTIAN COMMUNITY AND WAS A CRIME AGAINST THE STATE.” [The Emerging Church: Part One, page 110 ]


    They declared that if you deny the DIVINITY OF CHRIST or the CHRIST IS GOD doctrine, you are committing a CRIME against the STATE of ROME, and you read the History how do they PUNISH and TORTURE the people who commit crimes against them, and how many people they burned in the STAKE during the time of their DEADLY HOLY ROMAN INQUISITION.

    So the people of that time have no choice but to accept that JESUS is GOD, whether they like it or not for it is a LAW that was imposed by the CHURCH through the ROMAN EMPIRE that they must accept or else…

    Do we need to force people to believe in the truth? And punish them if they will not accept it?

    You think about that ACTS OF LAGUNA? What you believed about God and Jesus is a CATHOLIC BELIEF? Can that false church would be the source of the TRUTH?

    Ponder this verse my friend:

    Job 14:4 "Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? not one."[KJV]

    ReplyDelete
  25. Peter.. again you miss my point, yet you called me anti-Bible.. :(

    In Webster Dictionary: "Name" means a word or term by which a person or thing is called; a title; reputation; authority..

    This is what I mean:
    Ex: I called you Peter, but you have no authority of whatever sort. Then what I did is just a mere calling a name. But when I say, In Jesus Name!.. there is authority.

    To make it clear for you:
    Genesis 17:1 "..the LORD appeared to Abram, and said unto him, I am THE ALMIGHTY GOD; walk before me, and be thou perfect."
    > God mentioned His Title, His Authority.

    ... before He ever mentioned His Name:
    Exodus 6:3 And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by my name JEHOVAH was I not known to them.

    Genesis 21:33 And Abraham planted a grove in Beersheba, and called there on the name of the LORD, THE EVERLASTING GOD.
    > Abraham did not add meaning to the Name of God, he simply declare God's characteristic or reputation.

    Isaiah 9:6 declares the Title of Jesus, His reputation, His authority... not an additional long name.

    And Peter, again, I'm not a Trinitarian. Jesus is the Almighty God! Jesus is the manifestation of God in the flesh. Your long comments become meaningless because of your endless assumptions. And as I have said, let's discuss it further in "Why Jesus Christ can't be God".

    For your issue of translation:
    Majority wins, hell, flat... really sad.. :(
    Can't believe you actually lectured me from the basics.. sad :(

    Peter, I'm just requesting you to speak in a mature manner, that's all. As I have said, don't throw boomerang, it might hit you.

    Regards... :)

    ReplyDelete
  26. Peter of Las Pinas10 March 2012 at 15:45

    Acts of Laguna said (emphasis mine):

    “And Peter, again, I'm not a Trinitarian. JESUS IS THE ALMIGHTY GOD! Jesus is the manifestation of God in the flesh. Your long comments become meaningless because of your endless assumptions. And as I have said, let's discuss it further in "Why Jesus Christ can't be God".


    I have shown you proofs from History and from Catholic Authorities that the belief regarding the DIVINITY OF JESUS was a formulated doctrine of the Catholic Church during the 4th Century [325 A.D. at the Council of Nicaea]. And Historians proved that prior to that time, there was no doctrine that Jesus Christ is God, and it was not an original belief of the First Century Christians.

    And Apostle Paul, warned the Early Christians about this matter:

    2 Cor 11:3-4 “But I fear lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve in his craftiness, so your thoughts should be corrupted from the simplicity due to Christ. For if, indeed, THE ONE COMING PROCLAIMS ANOTHER JESUS, WHOM WE HAVE NOT PROCLAIMED, or if you receive another spirit, which you did not receive, or another gospel, which you never accepted, you might well endure these . [Modern King James]

    There are people that will come and will teach and proclaim another Jesus [a different Jesus according to other Bible versions] which the Apostles did not proclaimed. So as you can see even the time of the Early Christians, the apostles already gave a warning.

    What is the proclamation of the Apostles regarding Jesus?

    Romans 5:17 “It is true that through the sin of one man death began to rule because of that one man. But how much greater is the result of what was done by the ONE MAN, JESUS CHRIST! All who receive God's abundant grace and are freely put right with him will rule in life through Christ.” [GNB]

    1 Tim 2:5 “For there is one God, and there is one who brings God and human beings together, THE MAN CHRIST JESUS,” [GNB]


    These passages were written long after Jesus went up to heaven. But as you can see the Apostles said He is a MAN, that’s how they declared and proclaimed Jesus Christ’s true nature even by the time he was already in heaven.

    But those who will come will teach and proclaim another Jesus, a kind of Jesus they did not proclaimed, they will not teach Jesus as a MAN, but as a GOD, God reincarnated into Human. Jesus with a dual nature – GOD and MAN.

    Of which the apostles never taught at all.

    Whether you believed in the Trinity or not, you still uphold an original Catholic Doctrine which is the teaching that Jesus Christ is Truly God, and that makes you of no differ from the Catholics in their belief about Jesus.

    THEY ARE THE ORIGINAL MY FRIEND NOT YOU NOR YOUR RELIGION…

    PROVING THAT JESUS IS GOD IS PROVING THAT THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IS CORRECT ABOUT JESUS BEING GOD.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Peter of Las Pinas10 March 2012 at 15:47

    So the teachings that they admitted to be just a formulated doctrine will be true after all. An invention that turns out to be True.

    Remember that the Trinity teaches that Jesus Christ is also the Father and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, since to them he is one God with three persons.

    So Jesus to them is also the ALMIGHTY GOD, which of course UNBIBLICAL, for there is no verse in the Bible you can find that says Jesus is the Almighty.

    If Jesus is the ALMIGHTY GOD it would mean that he is ABOVE ALL.

    But look at Jesus’ declaration about himself:

    John 14:28 “You heard me tell you, 'I'm going away, but I'm coming back to you.' If you loved me, you would be glad that I'm going to the Father, because THE FATHER IS GREATER THAN I AM.”[GWT]

    And if he is also the EVERLASTING FATHER, why he said this?

    Matthew 23:9 “And don't call anyone on earth your father, BECAUSE YOU HAVE ONLY ONE FATHER, AND HE IS IN HEAVEN.” [GWT]

    There is only ONE FATHER and He is in heaven, definitely not Jesus.

    Jesus is our LORD, he is the SON of GOD, and not the EVERLASTING FATHER.

    Matthew 16:16-17 “Simon Peter answered, "YOU ARE THE MESSIAH, THE SON OF THE LIVING GOD!" Jesus replied, "Simon, son of Jonah, you are blessed! No human revealed this to you, but my Father in heaven revealed it to you.”[GWT]

    You said:

    “Isaiah 9:6 declares the Title of Jesus, His reputation, His authority... not an additional long name.”

    This is just your assumption.


    Becuase it’s very clear that PELE-JOEZ-EL-GIBBOR-ABI-AD-SAR-SHALOM, is not His Title. It does not denotes the CHILD’S nature or the POWER or AUTHORITY that he possess, it is simply the meaning of that LONG HEBREW NAME. The Jews understood that it’s a name that’s why they maintained the Hebrew words, and only TRANSLITERATED it and not TRANSLATED it in English.

    Isaiah 9:6 (9:5) “For a child is born unto us, a son is given unto us; and the government is upon his shoulder; and his name is called PELE- JOEZ-EL-GIBBOR-ABI-AD-SAR-SHALOM;” [Jewish Publication Society Bible]

    Because Jesus is not the GOD ALMIGHTY or EVERLASTING FATHER.

    No one among the Apostles nor the Early Christians believed that he is. And if you insist that your interpretation of that verse is correct, we will be forced to admit that in the Bible there are CONTRADICTIONS and CONFUSIONS, for I already showned you proof from the Bible that he isn’t.

    But there are no contradictions in the Bible that will create confusion. Why?

    1 Cor 14:33 “For GOD IS NOT THE AUTHOR OF CONFUSION, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.” [KJV]

    There is no need for me to go to the other thread. I can answer you here. But remember I challenged you to show me a NEW ARGUMENT, meaning a reasoning that is never been used by the Catholics nor the Protestants in the past. I’m looking for a new argument that will prove that Jesus is God, the one not yet answered by the INC.

    Because as I have told you all the verses used and the arguments used by these two religions were all been answered by the INC decades ago, that’s why as you know, majority of INC members were from these two big religions.

    There is no more argument or reasoning of other religion regarding this topic I can think of that is not yet left unanswered.

    If you have that, I guess that’s the one I wanna see, and I wanna talk about.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Peter... since you have much exposure on this topic, why can't you just answer plainly rather than use a lot of ornamental but empty words. Are you saying all this to convince me or yourself.. :(

    Anyways, sorry for the inconvenience... back to our topic..

    Apostle Paul said:
    1Timothy 6:14 That thou keep this commandment without spot, unrebukeable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ: v15 Which in his times he shall shew, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords; v16 Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen.

    Question: When, Who and How did Jesus proclaim this?

    Regards..... :)

    ReplyDelete
  29. Peter of Las Pinas10 March 2012 at 21:00

    Acts of Laguna said:

    “Apostle Paul said:

    1Timothy 6:14 That thou keep this commandment without spot, unrebukeable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ: v15 Which in his times he shall shew, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords; v16 Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen.

    Question: When, Who and How did Jesus proclaim this?”


    Are you 100% sure that those mentioned in verses 15 to 16 pertains to Jesus?

    Verse 14 said?

    “Which in his times he shall shew, who is the blessed and only Potentate,…”

    The verse does not say it was Jesus, but it said that his mission was to show to us who is the one being mentioned as the blessed and only Potentate, the King of Kings, Lord of Lords, Who only hath immortality, etc.

    Who is it? Apostle Pual already told to Timothy at the earlier part of his letter:

    1 Tim 1:17 “To the eternal King, immortal and invisible, THE ONLY GOD---to him be honor and glory forever and ever! Amen.” [GNB]

    The immortal and invisible one, the eternal King, the Only GOD. And who is this Only God mentioned by Apostle Paul?

    Apostle Paul of course will give us an answer:

    Ephesians 1:3 “PRAISE THE GOD AND FATHER OF OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST! Through Christ, God has blessed us with every spiritual blessing that heaven has to offer.” [ GWT]

    The only God is the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.

    From whom Apostle Paul learned this? The Bible has this to say:

    John 20:17 “Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ASCEND UNTO MY FATHER, AND YOUR FATHER; AND TO MY GOD, AND YOUR GOD.” [KJV]

    It was Jesus Christ himself who told that His Father should also be our Father, and His God, should be our God.

    Plain and simple: HIS GOD, OUR GOD.

    The God of Jesus Christ should be your God ACTS OF LAGUNA…
    And the proof that it was really God and not Jesus Christ that was being mentioned in verses 15 to 16?

    Look at these verses my friend:

    1Tim 6:14-16 “Do what you were commanded to do without fault or blame until the time when our Lord Jesus Christ comes again. God will make that happen at the right time. God is the blessed and only Ruler. He is the King of all kings and the Lord of all lords. God is the only one who never dies. He lives in light so bright that people cannot go near it. No one has ever seen him; no one is able to see him. All honor and power belong to him forever. Amen.” [Easy-to-Read Version]

    1 Tim 6:14-16 “Promise to obey completely and fully all that you have been told until our Lord Jesus Christ returns. The glorious God is the only Ruler, the King of kings and Lord of lords. At the time that God has already decided, he will send Jesus Christ back again. Only God lives forever! And he lives in light that no one can come near. No human has ever seen God or ever can see him. God will be honored, and his power will last forever. Amen.”[CEV]

    Jesus is not invisible nor immortal, because he died on the cross, and he himself said that God is spirit [John 4:24], which has no flesh and bones [Luke 24:39], that’s why He is invisible, and Jesus is not for he has flesh and bones.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Peter of Las Pinas10 March 2012 at 21:07

    Now, I know and I’m pretty sure that you will say, Jesus is King of Kings and Lord of Lords and there is a verse that said that

    Revelations 17:14 “These shall make war with the Lamb, and the LAMB shall overcome them: for HE IS LORD OF LORDS, AND KING OF KINGS: and they that are with him are called, and chosen, and faithful.” [KJV]

    Yup, absolutely right that Jesus Christ is the one mentioned in that passage for he is the Lamb of God as mentioned in John 1:29.

    But how did he became Lord of Lords and King of Kings? Were this power and authority legitimate to Jesus and no one gave him like the God Almighty who has legitimate power?

    Matthew 28:18 “When Jesus came near, he spoke to them. He said, "ALL AUTHORITY IN HEAVEN AND ON EARTH HAS BEEN GIVEN TO ME.”[GWT]

    Who gave him?

    Matthew 11:27 "MY FATHER HAS GIVEN ME ALL THINGS. No one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him.” [GNB]

    It was clear that all power and authorities was given to him by God the Father. That’s why he is KING OF KINGS, and LORD OF LORDS, it was not a legitimate power of Jesus, but a power vested to him by the Father. He will not have those if the Father the ONLY TRUE GOD did not gave him.
    After all the power and authorities had been given to him, what then will be done by Jesus afterwards?

    1 Cor 15:27-28 “Clearly, GOD HAS PUT EVERYTHING UNDER CHRIST'S AUTHORITY. When God says that everything has been put under Christ's authority, this clearly excludes God, since God has put everything under Christ's authority. BUT WHEN GOD PUTS EVERYTHING UNDER CHRIST'S AUTHORITY, THE SON WILL PUT HIMSELF UNDER GOD'S AUTHORITY, SINCE GOD HAD PUT EVERYTHING UNDER THE SON'S AUTHORITY. THEN GOD WILL BE IN CONTROL OF EVERYTHING.” [God’s Words Translation]

    There is nothing will ever be beautiful than the explanation of the Bible itself. After God gave all power and authorities to Jesus, he will submit himself and put himself under God’s authority, and God of course, the FATHER, will be in control of everything in other versions it says: “and God will rule completely over all.” [Good News Bible]

    So very clearly that you just misinterpreted 1 Timothy 6:14-16, for those mentioned in verses 15 to 16 do not pertain to Jesus, but to God the Father the Almighty, THE ONLY TRUE GOD [John 17:3,1]

    God bless you all!

    ReplyDelete
  31. Peter... sorry, need to re-post...

    Apostle Paul said:
    1Timothy 6:14 That thou keep this commandment without spot, unrebukeable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ: v15 Which in his times he shall shew, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords; v16 Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen.

    Question: When, Who and How did Jesus proclaim this?

    Your initial response:
    Are you 100% sure that those mentioned in verses 15 to 16 pertains to Jesus?
    > I'm sure you know that this is not what I mean...
    > Above verse simply said that it is Jesus who will proclaim who really God is... to His appointed time. I did not say that Paul proclaim Jesus this way...

    As Jesus said:
    Luke 10:22 All things are delivered to me of my Father: and no man knoweth who the Son is, but the Father; and who the Father is, but the Son, and he to whom the Son will reveal him.

    Truly the Gospel focus on man's salvation, disciple preached Jesus the way it(salvation) should be preached... but the Gospel writer revealed bit by bit who Jesus has.

    The Hebrew writer made it more vivid when he says that the flesh of Jesus is the "veil" that cover the holiest of holy, the abode of God in the tabernacle. But then again it is not proper to call Jesus God while He was yet walking in the flesh, but the Son of God (Luke 1:35, the "Holy Thing" that was born). But after that this veil was rented, Thomas called Him God, Stephen called Him God, Apostle Paul called Him God (Titus 2:13)... but the greatest revelation belongs to Jesus Himself, and that happened during the days of John in Patmos...

    Jesus send an angel to reveal this words to the Churches..

    Revelation 22:16 I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.
    > can a mere man be the source of his own parents?

    The angel also proclaimed that the Lord Jesus Christ is the First and the Last!!!

    Revelation 2:8 And unto the angel of the church in Smyrna write; These things saith the first and the last, which was dead, and is alive;

    The God that created the heavens and the earth is the only God that claim this title:

    Isaiah 44:6 Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God.
    > can a mere man claim this title for his own?

    This angel also proclaim that Jesus is the Almighty!!!

    Revelation 1:8 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.
    > can a mere man say that he is Almighty?

    My friend, it is easy to say that Jesus is a great man. Most of the Jews seen Jesus that way, even the Muslims.. and this is the very message of John for those people...

    John 1:10 He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not. v11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not.

    If you received Christ that way and willing to stay that way, its up to you. But as for me, I want to know Him more...(Php 3:10)..

    Regards and God Bless.... :)

    ReplyDelete
  32. Peter of Las Pinas11 March 2012 at 17:44

    Acts of Laguna you said:

    “The Hebrew writer made it more vivid when he says that the flesh of Jesus is the "veil" that cover the holiest of holy, the abode of God in the tabernacle. BUT THEN AGAIN IT IS NOT PROPER TO CALL JESUS GOD WHILE HE WAS YET WALKING IN THE FLESH, BUT THE SON OF GOD (Luke 1:35, the "Holy Thing" that was born). BUT AFTER THAT THIS VEIL WAS RENTED, THOMAS CALLED HIM GOD, STEPHEN CALLED HIM GOD, APOSTLE PAUL CALLED HIM GOD (Titus 2:13)... but the greatest revelation belongs to Jesus Himself, and that happened during the days of John in Patmos...”

    I can see so very clearly that there is nothing new or different in your belief regarding Jesus with the Catholics and Protestants. What would I expect; your religion of course copied this doctrine from the originator and inventor of this teaching and taught this centuries ago.

    And as a Catholic and Protestant style you are avoiding my verses. And continue to throw me verses which you think you can use to prove that your copied belief is True.

    You said:

    “BUT THEN AGAIN IT IS NOT PROPER TO CALL JESUS GOD WHILE HE WAS YET WALKING IN THE FLESH, BUT THE SON OF GOD.”

    Of course, It is not proper to call Jesus God, because he said he is a MAN, that’s why?

    John 8:40 “I AM A MAN WHO HAS TOLD YOU THE TRUTH THAT I HEARD FROM GOD. But now you want to kill me. Abraham wouldn't have done that.” [GWT]

    Jesus is a MAN who heard truth from GOD, so Jesus is different from GOD, the Jesus who heard the truth is a Man, and the God who told him the truth is of course the ONLY TRUE GOD which is the FATHER [John 17:3,1] which is spirit in nature [John 4:24], and dwells in heaven [Matthew 6:9].

    During the time when Jesus was on earth, the only TRUE GOD is in heaven. And this same God who spoke that:

    Isaiah 43:10 "People of Israel, you are my witnesses; I chose you to be my servant, so that you would know me and believe in me and understand that I AM THE ONLY GOD. BESIDES ME THERE IS NO OTHER GOD; THERE NEVER WAS AND NEVER WILL BE.” [GNB]

    The only TRUE GOD proclaimed that there will never be any other God besides him. So by insisting that Jesus became God afterwards, we are defying what God had said. We are trying to prove that God is a hypocritical liar. He said there will never be NO other God besides him, after that he allowed Jesus to become God also, and that will make God a Liar in that verse.

    And you assume that Apostle Paul, Thomas, and Stephen called him God? After his resurrection? So you mean to say when Jesus was resurrected his nature was changed from Human to God?

    Have you forgotten Jesus’ statement right after he came back to life and met Mary Magdalene?

    John 20:17 “Jesus said to her, "You don't need to hold on to me! I have not yet gone back up to the Father. But go to my followers and tell them this: 'I AM GOING BACK TO MY FATHER AND YOUR FATHER. I AM GOING BACK TO MY GOD AND YOUR GOD.'" [ERV]

    Word for word declaration, from Jesus, and very very clear, because this is not a PARABLE. It is a direct statement. That his FATHER should be our FATHER, and his GOD should be our GOD.

    There is only one GOD Acts of Laguna, if Jesus is your GOD, then the FATHER of Jesus is definitely not your GOD, because if the Father is also your God, then how many God do you have now? It would appear then that you are directly defying what he said on that Verse.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Peter of Las Pinas11 March 2012 at 17:46

    Let us go first to Apostle Thomas.

    You assume that Apostle Thomas call him GOD, so for Apostle Thomas he believed that Jesus is God contradicting what he said in John 20:17.

    I know what verse you are talking about, an original Catholic Favorite verse:

    John 20:28 “Thomas answered him, "MY LORD AND MY GOD!" [GNB]

    The problem with those who use this verse, they oftenly just jumping into conclusion that both words LORD and GOD both referred to Jesus.

    Similar to Titus 2:13:

    Titus 2:13 “Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;” [KJV]

    Even to this verse you are assuming that the word GOD AND SAVIOUR both pertains to Jesus.

    Let’s go back to Thomas, when he said the phrase: “MY LORD AND MY GOD”, what event took place prior to that? Why he said that?

    That event took place after the resurrection of the Lord, and the first time he appeared to the disciples Thomas was not with them:

    John 20:24-25 “One of the twelve disciples, Thomas (called the Twin), was not with them when Jesus came. So the other disciples told him, "We have seen the Lord!" Thomas said to them, "UNLESS I SEE THE SCARS OF THE NAILS IN HIS HANDS AND PUT MY FINGER ON THOSE SCARS AND MY HAND IN HIS SIDE, I WILL NOT BELIEVE." [GNB]

    See? Thomas here very clearly said “ I WILL NOT BELIEVE.”

    He don’t believe that Jesus had risen from the dead. He need proofs before he will believe that Jesus Christ resurrected.

    So if Thomas here really regard Jesus as his God. We could certainly say then that Doubting Thomas do not believe Jesus Christ his God, can be alive again. He is doubting the power of his God, for he cannot believe that he was risen from the dead and will only believe unless he see him personally and he first need to see proofs by means of touching him.

    Did Jesus told the Apostles that after he resurrected he is no longer a human but he will turn into God? There was no record of that from the Bible. What he said was MY GOD YOUR GOD in John 20:17. If you are one of the Apostles who have received that Message would you still think Jesus is your God after Jesus said that already?

    So why are you assuming now that Thomas would think or say that Jesus is his God.

    So what happen after he actually seen him:

    John 20:26 “A week later the disciples were together again indoors, and Thomas was with them. The doors were locked, but Jesus came and stood among them and said, "Peace be with you."

    John 20:27 “Then he said to Thomas, "PUT YOUR FINGER HERE, AND LOOK AT MY HANDS; THEN REACH OUT YOUR HAND AND PUT IT IN MY SIDE. STOP YOUR DOUBTING, AND BELIEVE!"

    John 20:28 “Thomas answered him, "MY LORD AND MY GOD!" [GNB]


    Thomas out of his extreme surprise, he shouted “MY LORD AND MY GOD”!

    Of course it is quite normal for us when we see extremely surprising scenarios or events, we often exclaim MY LORD! And sometimes MY GOD! And I’m sure you’re doing that also.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Peter of Las Pinas12 March 2012 at 11:20

      Erratum:

      You assume that Apostle Thomas call him GOD, so for Apostle Thomas he believed that Jesus is God contradicting what he said in John 20:17.

      Should be:

      You assume that Apostle Thomas call him GOD, so for Apostle Thomas he believed that Jesus is God contradicting what Jesus said in John 20:17.

      Sorry I'm just a human.

      Delete
  34. Peter of Las Pinas11 March 2012 at 17:49

    But it’s clear that Thomas said two entities here: MY LORD and MY GOD.

    If Thomas only said: “YOU ARE MY LORD GOD!” or “JESUS YOU ARE MY LORD AND MY GOD!”, and that could have end all arguments on this issue

    But he plainly said: MY LORD and MY GOD.

    Which clearly shows that Thomas as an Apostle of Christ believed that there is ONE GOD and there is ONE LORD. And who are these?

    1 Cor 8:6 “But for us, "There is only ONE GOD, THE FATHER. Everything came from him, and we live for him. There is only ONE LORD, JESUS CHRIST. Everything came into being through him, and we live because of him." [GWT]

    For the Apostles there is only ONE GOD – THE FATHER

    And only ONE LORD – JESUS CHRIST

    You might say, why the verse say ONLY ONE LORD? so it means he is God because God is also LORD and since there is only one LORD it means Jesus is God.

    WRONG!!!

    There are many Lords among the humans, but there is only one MAN that God made Lord above all of them.

    Acts 2:36 "All the people of Israel, then, are to know for sure that THIS JESUS, WHOM YOU CRUCIFIED, IS THE ONE THAT GOD HAS MADE LORD AND MESSIAH!" [GNB]

    It was only Jesus among the Human beings he made LORD, that’s why he is our ONLY ONE LORD above them all.

    So when Thomas said: MY LORD he is referring to JESUS CHRIST, and when he said MY GOD, he is referring to the FATHER for that is the belief of all the Apostles and the Early Christians.

    To be continued with the rest of your VERSES. You can do the same also by refuting my verses one by one, I know the viewers of this Blog would love to see that…

    ReplyDelete
  35. Can you do the same Acts of Laguna?

    Can you please refute all the verses that Bro. Peter used and refute all the arguments he is throwing at you.

    You are just throwing verses at him, but you are not refuting his.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Catherine.. good day... :)

      In any conversation, it is much easier to talk freely if both parties know their stand. I'm not just throwing nonsense, I need to make some grounds for Peter. Just like I said, I would like to discuss, not to debate. And I'm not refuting any verse, but ones understanding... :)

      Delete
    2. Ok prove to us that Bro. Peter wrongly understood verses in the Bible:

      Start with this one:

      John 20:17 “Jesus said to her, "You don't need to hold on to me! I have not yet gone back up to the Father. But go to my followers and tell them this: 'I AM GOING BACK TO MY FATHER AND YOUR FATHER. I AM GOING BACK TO MY GOD AND YOUR GOD.'" [ERV]

      Prove to us that his understanding of this verse is WRONG. How we should understand this verse? How can be Jesus be our God though he already said that Our God is his God and Father?

      Delete
  36. Peter of Las Pinas12 March 2012 at 11:07

    @Acts of Laguna,

    There are only two things that the believer of the Catholic invented doctrine-JESUS IS GOD that they always falls in.

    1. Wrong Translation of the Verse

    2. Wrong Understanding and Misinterpretation of the Verse


    As I have told you very clearly the Apostles have nor the Early Christians have no such doctrine that Jesus is God. Even those proponents of that belief admitted that.

    As I quote again:

    “We read the Gospels and the book of Acts in the light of our understanding of the pre-existence and the incarnation of God the Son. However, THE EARLY CHRISTIANS HAD NO SUCH CONCEPTS IN THEIR MINDS. THEY HAD NO DOCTRINE OF THE DEITY OF CHRIST.” [The Young Church: Acts of the Apostles, page 48]

    The EARLY CHRISTIANS have no concept nor DOCTRINE of the DEITY OF CHRIST, in other words during the Time of the Apostles and the Early Christians no one believed that JESUS is GOD.

    That’s why Thomas do not believe that Jesus is God, neither Apostle Paul.

    Now, I will continue to answer and refute how you understand your verses. Let us go now to Titus 2:13,

    Titus 2:13 “Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of THE GREAT GOD AND OUR SAVIOUR JESUS CHRIST;” [KJV]

    The problem with those who using this passage is they created an assumption that because it uses the article “and” it means both words GOD and SAVIOUR pertains to Jesus Christ.

    So they concluded that Apostle Paul is calling Jesus Christ God.

    Remember that in the Bible there is no CONTRADICTIONS, don’t you think it would appear that if Apostle Paul really called Jesus GOD in this verse, he is directly contradicting himself?

    Why?

    1 Cor 8:6 “BUT FOR US, "THERE IS ONLY ONE GOD, THE FATHER. Everything came from him, and we live for him. There is only one Lord, Jesus Christ. Everything came into being through him, and we live because of him." [GWT]

    He said very clearly: “BUT FOR US, "THERE IS ONLY ONE GOD, THE FATHER”

    For them, the True Christians and of course also for Apostle Paul for he is the speaker in that verse, there is only one God, The FATHER, if we will understood Titus 2:13 as Apostle Paul calling Jesus God, we will end up asking, is Jesus the FATHER?

    Where is that in the Bible? Does the Bible Teaches that Jesus is the FATHER?

    Jesus Christ himself proved that he is not the FATHER by saying this:

    Matthew 23:9 “And don't call anyone on earth your father, because YOU HAVE ONLY ONE FATHER, AND HE IS IN HEAVEN.” [GWT]

    I will quote that phrase again for clarity:

    “YOU HAVE ONLY ONE FATHER, AND HE IS IN HEAVEN”

    Only an anti-Christ would still insist that Jesus is the FATHER upon reading that statement. Because it is very very clear that Jesus is not the FATHER, number one reason, when he said that, he was on Earth and not in Heaven so he is talking about a different being which is in heaven and not himself.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Peter of Las Pinas12 March 2012 at 11:12

    Now how we should understand Titus 2:13?

    The speaker in that verse is Apostle Paul, why we are the one who will explain what he really meant since he is the one talking in that passage and not you, me or anyone.

    Let us let Apostle Paul tell us what he really meant, did he really called Jesus God? Who is the Great God Apostle Paul is referring to?

    Titus 1:4 “To Titus, mine own son after the common faith: Grace, mercy, and peace, from GOD THE FATHER AND THE LORD JESUS CHRIST OUR SAVIOUR.” [KJV]

    Let us place the two phrases closer together:

    Titus 2:13 “…THE GREAT GOD AND OUR SAVIOUR JESUS CHRIST.”

    Titus 1:4 “from GOD THE FATHER AND THE LORD JESUS CHRIST OUR SAVIOUR”

    So the True meaning of Titus 2:13 is:

    Titus 2:13 “Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of THE GREAT GOD [referring to the FATHER] AND OUR SAVIOUR JESUS CHRIST;” [KJV]

    Apostle Paul is not calling Jesus Christ God in Titus 2:13, it was already cleared in Titus 1:4 that the word GREAT GOD, is not referring to Jesus but to GOD THE FATHER. Apostle Paul only believe in ONE GOD who is the FATHER, so there is no way he will call JESUS also GOD in Titus 2:13.

    All those who understood this verse that way, are just making a Big mistake.

    But of course they will never ran out of reasoning because when we will look at the verse in the KJV it said:

    Titus 2:13 “looking for that blessed hope, and THE GLORIOUS APPEARING of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;” [KJV]

    They will say the verse mentioned “THE GLORIOUS APPEARING of the GREAT GOD”, it was Jesus Christ who would appear on Judgment Day in his Second Coming, so it’s clear that the word GREAT GOD, refers to Jesus.

    WRONG AGAIN!!!

    Because “GLORIOUS APPEARING” also means “APPEARING OF THE GLORY”. Look at this verse:

    Titus 2:13 “looking for the blessed hope and APPEARING OF THE GLORY of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; [ASV]

    So it’s not really talking about the Physical Appearance but the APPEARANCE or SHOWING OF THE GLORY of the Great God the Father and our Saviour Jesus Christ.

    On Judgment Day both of them will show their glory. That’s why we can ask now: Is it true that the FATHER also will show his Glory and not only Jesus Christ on Judgment Day?

    Jesus of course will answer us:

    Luke 9:26 “For whosoever shall be ashamed of me and of my words, of him shall the Son of man be ashamed, WHEN HE COMETH IN HIS OWN GLORY, AND THE GLORY OF THE FATHER, and of the holy angels. [Revised Version]

    When Judgment day comes it is not only Jesus Christ who will show his glory, also the GLORY OF the FATHER.

    There is no instance in the Bible, that Apostle called Jesus Christ God, they based their belief in their wrong understanding and wrong interpretation of Titus 2:13.

    For Apostle Paul, there is only one God –The Father [1 Cor 8:6] and the MAN Christ Jesus is the Mediator between God and men [1 Tim 2:5].

    Well unless you are blinded by the devil, there is no way you can accept that.

    To be continued…

    ReplyDelete
  38. Sabi ni Acts of Laguna sa kabilang post niya,

    “Oh, what a loving Father Jesus is!! He suffered so that He can give an eternal hope to the sinners....”


    Ang kaniya pa lang FATHER ay si JESUS. Kumbinsido ako na kalaban ni Cristo ang taong ito.

    Dahil maliwanag ang sabi ni Cristo.

    MY FATHER, YOUR FATHER, and MY GOD, YOUR GOD [John 20:17] at sinabi ni Jesus na YOU HAVE ONLY ONE FATHER AND HE IS IN HEAVEN [Mat 23:9], kaya napakaliwanag na hindi si Jesus ang FATHER.

    Sayang marunong pa naman sana sa Biblia, kaya lang alam lang bumuklat at sumipi ng talata, hindi naman niya nauunawa.

    God bless sa inyo mga kapatid.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jessica... thanks for taking time reading my post...

      I also expect to receive conclusion such as yours, ...even worst than this.. but then again, God is our righteous judge.

      But more than that, I thank God for this opportunity, to read His word and to share it to others. I believe its not about the messenger nor the recipient but the message itself. If you missed the message of the cross, you missed the point...

      Regards...... :)

      Delete
    2. What message of the cross you're talking about?

      Does the Cross spoke to you that Jesus is the FATHER?

      Go ahead, educate me Acts of Laguna.

      Delete
  39. Peter of Las Pinas12 March 2012 at 17:07

    Acts of Laguna said:

    “BUT AFTER THAT THIS VEIL WAS RENTED, THOMAS CALLED HIM GOD, STEPHEN CALLED HIM GOD, APOSTLE PAUL CALLED HIM GOD”


    I’m already done proving Apostle Paul and Thomas, Now let’s go to Stephen,

    Acts of Laguna believed that Stephen called Jesus God. And of course I knew so well what verse he’s talking about:

    Let us read another Catholic favorite verse:

    Act 7:59 “And they stoned Stephen, calling upon God, and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.” [KJV]

    When you look at the KJV where this verse is written, one thing you will noticed is that the word GOD in this verse is in italics or italicized. And do you know what italics mean when you find it in the verses of the KJV?

    “THE ITALICIZED WORDS IN THE KING JAMES BIBLE ARE WORDS THAT WERE ADDED BY THE TRANSLATORS TO HELP THE READER. This is usually necessary when translating from one language to another because word meanings and idioms change. So, to produce a more readable translation, the King James translators (1604- 1611) added certain words to the Bible text. HOWEVER, TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYONE UNDERSTOOD THAT THESE WORDS WERE NOT IN THE AVAILABLE MANUSCRIPTS THEY SET THEM IN ITALICS.” [http://www.av1611.org/jmelton/italics.html]

    What are the italics in the verses of the KJV?

    1. They are words that were added by the Translators to Help the Reader

    2. They were italicized to make sure that everyone understood that these words were not in the available manuscripts.

    Very clear, they are words that were added by the Translators which are not found or available in any available or existing manuscripts.

    So the word “GOD” in Acts 7:59 is just an insertion of the Translator, of course who believed in Jesus Christ is God, that’s why they done that.

    The perpetrators of this invented belief will do anything even to twist passages just to have a reference in their WRONG BELIEF about Jesus.

    This was proven also by another Bible Commentator:

    “Acts 7:59 - THE WORD GOD IS NOT FOUND IN ANY MS [Manuscripts]. OR VERSION, nor in any of the primitive fathers except Chrysostom. IT IS NOT GENUINE, AND SHOULD NOT BE INSERTED HERE: the whole sentence literally reads thus: And they stoned Stephen, invoking and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit!” [Adam Clarke’s Commentary on the Bible]

    So I will not go any further with this passage, it was clear that Stephen did not call Jesus God nor that verse suggested that he did. Because the Acts 7:59 of the KJV is wrongly translated.

    So sorry Acts of Laguna this one is clearly a WRONG TRANSLATION.

    So your belief that Apostle Paul, Thomas, and Stephen believed that Jesus is God and called Him God, are based only in your WRONG UNDERSTANDING and WRONG TRANSLATION of the Bible.

    I’m preparing for good Response for your Rev 22:16, Rev 1:8, John 1:10, etc.

    ‘Till next time…

    ReplyDelete
  40. Peter... good day..

    You said: (March 11)
    Of course, It is not proper to call Jesus God, because he said he is a MAN, that’s why?

    Apostle Paul told to the Church in Galatia:
    Galatians 1:12 It wasn't given or taught to me by some mere human. My message came directly from Jesus Christ when he appeared to me. (CEV)
    >> Jesus is not a man the way you understand it, neither He is Man became God as you suppose my belief. He was that God that took on Human flesh to save us.

    Now, concerning your thoughts with John 8:40:
    John 8:40 But now ye seek to kill me, a MAN that hath told you the truth, which I have heard of God: this did not Abraham.
    >> Here, Jesus is talking to them face to face, as an Israelite, man to man. He was not there to talk about His deity but regarding sin, freeing them from the bondage of sin through Him as the Lamb of God.

    As God have said through Prophet Isaiah:
    Isaiah 40:3 The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the LORD, make straight in the desert a highway FOR OUR GOD.
    >> John the Baptist prepared that way for our Lord, the omnipresent God, as written in Luke 3:4-6 “..And all flesh shall see the salvation of God”

    Isaiah 40:9 “… say unto the cities of Judah, Behold your God! “
    >> John the Baptist said, Behold the Lamb of God!
    John 1:29 The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.
    >> The very message of John 8:40: the Lamb of God is the Man, the Flesh separated by God, the Holy Thing that was born called the “Son of God” (Luke 1:35). And if one man sees Jesus, he had seen the invisible God.

    Isaiah 40:10 Behold, the Lord GOD will come with strong hand, and his arm shall rule for him: behold, his reward is with him, and his work before him.
    >> He said “His arm shall rule for Him”. Jesus do miracle with the finger of God (Luke 11:20), God’s arm was not detach from Him; “Jesus” is God extending His arm to save His people. The very meaning of God-given name, Jesus… YHWH-salvation. (Same with John Chapter 1)

    And contrary to what you understand about the abode of God, quoting that the Father is in heaven:
    What is Omnipresent to you?
    God said, heaven is my throne, earth is my footstool. When Jesus taught His disciple to pray, He doesn’t teach that God dwells only in heaven, but that they should pray pleading in the throne of God.

    And as Jesus reveals a bit of His nature:
    John 3:13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.
    >> Jesus was very much in heaven while He was talking to them.

    Isaiah 40:11 He shall feed his flock like a shepherd: he shall gather the lambs with his arm, and carry them in his bosom, and shall gently lead those that are with young.
    >> Jesus is the Good Shepherd, and give His life for the sheep. That is God showing His love or the people. Not that one great being requested a lesser being to die on the cross so that the greater being can show his love. Honestly, I can’t find love on that… in the purest sense.
    >> God is the author of Love, can’t the author Himself express this? Why not if He can?... well, He does because of His love.
    >> God didn’t die on the cross, only the flesh. How do you explain death? Separation of the spirit from the flesh isn’t it?

    Isaiah 40:25 To whom then will ye liken me, or shall I be equal? saith the Holy One.
    >> I believe you place Jesus in such honor and preeminence as man, but we see Him as God humbling himself for His love towards us. He laid aside all His glory for our sake.

    Regards.... :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. All that verses were already answered by our ministers. You are misinterpreting verses.

      I am still waiting for you ACTS OF LAGUNA to explain to me the meaning of John 20:17.

      Ipaliwanag mo na mali ang pagkakaintindi naming mga INC sa verse na iyan.

      Go on Mr. Acts of Laguna.

      Delete
  41. For you response in the case of Thomas:

    You said:
    Thomas out of his extreme surprise, he shouted “MY LORD AND MY GOD”!

    Well, I believe he was prepared to this event. He missed the first appearing of Christ that's why he doubted. By his action, he even denied the message of Christ about resurrection (beyond insulting words for the Lord that gave His life).

    But this is not the very first time Thomas doubted Jesus..
    John 11:16 Then said Thomas, which is called Didymus, unto his fellow disciples, Let us also go, that we may die with him.
    > Thomas always has this "to see is to believe" character. But Jesus allowed this, same with Judas. He choose some of weak faith, that after it is proven, his very source of faith will be of God.

    Jesus always told them, "..Why are ye fearful, O ye of little faith". Same with the Book of Matthew:
    Matthew 17:20 "And Jesus said unto them, Because of your unbelief: for verily I say unto you, If ye have faith as a grain of mustard seed,..."... Jesus is Teaching them to conquer their unbelief.

    No doubt that his faith in God increased and willingly gave his life for the ministry of the word:
    "Thomas called Didymus, preached the Gospel in Parthia and India, where exciting the rage of the pagan priests, he was martyred by being thrust through with a spear." (Foxes Book of Martyrs)

    Back to our case:
    Three and a half year with Christ, Who proclaimed the life after death, then suddenly, out of doubt and disbelief, Thomas condemn His resurrection. Thomas at that point, after seeing with his own eyes, felt sorry for his disbelief… and with broken heart , repented of his action and declare what King David has already spoken of..

    Psalms 35:23 Stir up thyself, and awake to my judgment, even unto my cause, my God and my Lord.

    What also bothers me is that when you added that Thomas referred to God in heaven and Lord as he looked on Jesus..
    > Extremely surprised yet able to think.. no way...

    Thomas might be freeze in shock, its possible, but at this point Jesus is already talking to Him (John 20:27) Your claim would be acceptable if verse 28 comes before verse 27... It is clear that he was not in shocked when he said those words because the Bible says "AND Thomas answered..." they're already communicating.

    By the way, the way we see it... he was in a repented situation, kneeling before Christ.

    Regards..... :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Eheemm

      What verse in the Bible that says Thomas is kneeling before Christ in that event?

      I'm just curious where is that in the Bible?

      So if Jesus Christ said to the Apostles including Thomas, MY FATHER YOUR FATHER and MY GOD YOUR GOD, in John 20:17, who do you think is the God of Thomas in John 20:28?

      You said they are already communicating, right?

      What Thomas said to Jesus prior to the time when he said, MY LORD and MY GOD?

      Delete
    2. Tanong lang po Mr ACTS of Laguna. Bakit po hindi na lang Almighty God ang nakasulat sa bible. Bakit my name pa ni Lord Jesus if kung sya rin lang naman at Almighty God ay iisa? Hindi po kaya magkaiba kaya sila kaya ganun? At wal rin naman sinasabi sa bible na sila ay iisa?

      Delete
  42. Peter of Las Pinas13 March 2012 at 13:23

    I have already proven that ACTS OF LAGUNA, is either MISINTERPRETING verses or using a MISTRANSLATED verse, so much like the Catholics and Protestants. What else would you expect? Of course they share the same doctrine that’s why they share also the same mistakes.

    Maybe he’s thinking that all his arguments regarding his belief about Jesus Christ being God is all new.

    Kaibigan MATANDA pa sa iyo at sa RELIHIYON mo ang mga argumento mo.

    As I told you, you don’t have an originilaty, you copied your beliefs to those religions which I believe you do not regard as TRUE RELIGIONS. Maybe you will say that you didn’t but I’m sure the founder of your religion did.

    You are not yet been born, all of those were already been answered, if you only gave the chance when you listen to the teachings of the INC you could have known the answer. Or if you already heard the answer, you just don’t want to accept them.

    I’m just being honest, I’m telling you right now, that there is no Biblical proof that Jesus was God then became MAN then became GOD again. All the believers of this doctrine only relied in two things which I already explained: WRONG INTERPRETATION and WRONG TRANSLATION.

    Do you think the INC will be at this glorious stage if someone already beaten her with this issue?

    Didn’t you observe that all other Christian religions were against the INC because we believe that the Father is the Only True God, and Jesus is a MAN, a messenger of God, the only Mediator between God and men?

    Like apostle Paul had said:

    1 Cor 8:5-7 “Even if there are so-called "gods," whether in heaven or on earth, and even though there are many of these "gods" and "lords," YET THERE IS FOR US ONLY ONE GOD, THE FATHER, who is the Creator of all things and for whom we live; and there is only one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things were created and through whom we live. BUT NOT EVERYONE KNOWS THIS TRUTH…”[GNB]

    Not everyone knows that the FATHER is the ONLY GOD, and you are included, because though the Apostles clearly said this you are still insisting that JESUS is GOD.

    Where is Jesus when he said that statement? Was he still on earth or already in heaven?

    Jesus right now at this very moment is sitting in the RIGHT HAND of God, if Jesus is also a God right now, there will be TWO GODS, one God sitting in the right hand of another God.

    The Bible already stated what is the nature of the one sitting in the right hand of God:

    Hebrews 10:12 “But THIS MAN, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, SAT DOWN ON THE RIGHT HAND OF GOD;”[KJV]

    Very clear and yet you can’t see this. Was this passage was spoken when Jesus was still on earth? Come on you know the answer to that.

    Jesus was already in Heaven sitting in the right hand of God, when these words were told by the writer of the Book of Hebrews which you loved to quote, right?

    The doctrine of the INC regarding the FATHER as the ONLY TRUE GOD is the main and primary reason that trigger me to decide to leave my religion and joined the INC.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Peter of Las Pinas13 March 2012 at 13:39

    Before I proceed with the other verses, I want to answer first this one, because this one is very very easy.

    Acts of Laguna said again:

    “Galatians 1:12 It wasn't given or taught to me by some mere human. My message came directly from Jesus Christ when he appeared to me. (CEV)

    >> Jesus is not a man the way you understand it, neither He is Man became God as you suppose my belief. He was that God that took on Human flesh to save us.”


    Let us quote the verse from a non paraphrased version:

    Gal 1:12 “For neither did I receive it from man, nor was I taught it, but it came to me through revelation of Jesus Christ.” [RV]

    This passage does not dictate that Jesus is God, nor Apostle Paul is believing that Jesus is God for he will contradict himself in 1 Cor 8:6 and in 1 Tim 2:5.

    These are the things that always make the supporter of the invented doctrine that Jesus is God confused.

    For the record, Apostle Paul would never contradict himself. He said that the FATHER is the ONLY GOD for them [1 Cor 8:6], so let’s stick to that. Unless you want to prove that Apostle Paul is a LIAR, then you read this one:

    2 Cor 11:31 “THE GOD AND FATHER OF THE LORD JESUS, who is praised forever, KNOWS THAT I'M NOT LYING.” [GWT]

    Now what is the meaning of the phrase: “For neither did I receive it from man”, would that suggests that Apostle Paul no longer believed that Jesus Christ is a man during the time that Jesus was already in Heaven?

    The writings of Apostle Paul are filled with testimony that he consider Jesus as a MAN, even so that Jesus Christ was already in heaven.

    He is just trying to say here that the revelations of Christ is not from Man, not because he believed that Jesus is not a Man, but because the teachings of Jesus is not from himself but from God, as Jesus Christ already stated long before the coming of Apostle Paul:

    John 7:16 “Jesus responded to them, "WHAT I TEACH DOESN'T COME FROM ME BUT FROM THE ONE WHO SENT ME. [ERV]”

    John 12:50 “And I know that whatever he says to do will bring eternal life. SO THE THINGS I SAY ARE EXACTLY WHAT THE FATHER TOLD ME TO SAY." [ERV]


    Dios ko po naman, kay liwa-liwanag nang mga verses na iyan.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Peter of Las Pinas13 March 2012 at 13:40

    The things that Jesus said and taught is not from Jesus Christ himself, but all comes from the FATHER exactly what the FATHER told him to say.

    That’s why Apostle Paul statement, does not suggests that he acknowledged Jesus as God, he was only saying that the words he received is not from a man but from God, because everything that Jesus is saying did not come from himself only, he only say what the FATHER – THE ONLY TRUE GOD [John 17:1,3] had instructed him to say.

    Another proof that Apostle Paul do not believe Jesus as God is this verse:

    Romans 5:14 “Yet death still had power over all who lived from the time of Adam to the time of Moses. This happened, though not everyone disobeyed a direct command from God, as Adam did. IN SOME WAYS ADAM IS LIKE CHRIST who came later.” [CEV]

    He compared Jesus Christ to Adam in this verse; Can we compare the Almighty God with any one? Does the most powerful God allow any body to compare Him to someone?

    Isaiah 46:5 “To whom will ye liken me, and make me equal, and compare me, that we may be like?”[RV]

    The Only True God do not allow any body or any human to compare him to any one, he is incomparable. By the fact that Apostle Paul compared Jesus to Adam it is quite clear that he is not acknowledging Jesus as the only true God or considering him as his God at all.

    And he did explain anyway what is Jesus’ true nature in that same chapter.

    Romans 5:15 But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by ONE MAN, JESUS CHRIST, hath abounded unto many. [KJV]

    It is VERY VERY WRONG to say that Apostle Paul or any Apostle regards Jesus as his God, there was no proof of that theory in the Bible. It’s quite certain that you are also just relying in your WRONG ASSUMPTION and WRONG UNDERSTANDING on this issue.

    Up next, your WRONG INTERPRETATION of the verses in Revelations that you used…I will put those response of yours just above my post on hold ‘till my second round, I need to respond first your previous posts.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Peter of Las Pinas13 March 2012 at 16:01

    So as I promise we will go to this one:

    Acts of Laguna said:

    “Jesus send an angel to reveal this words to the Churches..

    Revelation 22:16 I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.

    > can a mere man be the source of his own parents?”



    He thinks, as others think that in this verse Jesus is saying that he is the source of David his ancestor.

    Because of the phrase: “the ROOT and the OFFSPRING of David”

    Since the English word “ROOT” have a meaning of course – origin or source, the users of this verse Jumps with joy in their speculation that Jesus is saying here that it is from him David came from and from David he came from also. So the conclusion he is not Human, he’s a God for that is not possible for a human being to be the source of his own ancestors.

    So in simple words: David came from Jesus and Jesus came from David.

    It’s like a merry-go-round.

    Was that not confusing? Would God the Father allow confusion? Was He the author of these kind of things?

    The Bible said:

    1 Cor 14:33 “For God is not the author of CONFUSION,…” [KJV]

    The verse is not confusing it’s those who interpret this made it confusing. It’s their WRONG UNDERSTANDING of the passage are to be blamed.

    It is quite clear and a fact that Jesus came from the family or blood line of King David, and of course it’s not the other way around or both. So what makes it confusing is their understanding of the word “ROOT” that’s all.

    Let us take a similar verse with the same usage of the word “ROOT”:

    Romans 15:12 “And again, Esaias saith, There shall be a ROOT OF JESSE, and he that shall rise to reign over the Gentiles; in him shall the Gentiles trust.” [KJV]

    This one of course similar to Rev 22:16, is referring to Jesus

    And this was quoted by Apostle Paul as he mentioned from the book of Isaiah which says:

    Isaiah 11:10 “And in that day there shall be a ROOT OF JESSE, which shall stand for an ensign of the people; to it shall the Gentiles seek: and his rest shall be glorious.” [KJV]

    You see my dear friends, the phrase was in FUTURE TENSE and not in PAST TENSE:

    “…in that day there shall be a ROOT OF JESSE, which shall stand…”

    Meaning when the prophecy was spoken, the ROOT of JESSE still does not exist,

    “there shall be” meaning it will appear in the future

    Like “there shall be one church, and one shepherd” in John 10:16, the church mentioned and the shepherd do not exist yet when that words was spoken by Jesus.

    So how come he will be the source now as understood by ACTS OF LAGUNA, it’s clear in this verse that the ROOT mentioned will appear in the future.

    ReplyDelete
  46. Peter of Las Pinas13 March 2012 at 16:16

    What is the meaning of the word “ROOT”?

    Let us quote the verse from the KJV with Strong’s Concordance:

    Isaiah 11:10 And in that[H1931] day[H3117] there shall be[H1961] a root[H8328] of Jesse,[H3448] which[H834] shall stand[H5975] for an ensign[H5251] of the people;[H5971] to[H413] it shall the Gentiles[H1471] seek:[H1875] and his rest[H4496] shall be[H1961] glorious.[H3519]

    ROOT in Hebrew is שׁרשׁ
    Which has a meaning of:

    H8328
    שׁרשׁ
    sheresh
    sheh'-resh
    From H8327; a root (literally or figuratively): - BOTTOM, DEEP, HEEL, root.
    [Strong’s Hebrew Dictionary]


    So the passage simply means that Jesus shall be at the BOTTOM of JESSE, in other words his DESCENDANT.

    Jesus is the DESCENDANT of Jesse the father of King David. From the BOTTOM and not as his origin

    That’s why some modern translators understood the Hebrew meaning of the word SHERESH in English - ROOT, and translated Isaiah 11:10 this way:

    Isaiah 11:10 “The time is coming when ONE OF DAVID'S DESCENDANTS will be the signal for the people of all nations to come together. They will follow his advice, and his own nation will become famous.” [CEV]

    Isaiah 11:10 “A day is coming when the new king FROM THE ROYAL LINE OF DAVID will be a symbol to the nations. They will gather in his royal city and give him honor.” [GNB]

    Isaiah 11:10 “At that time there will be SOMEONE SPECIAL FROM JESSE'S FAMILY. He will be like a flag that all the nations gather around. The nations will come to him and ask him what they should do. And the place where he is will be filled with glory.” [ERV]


    Translators and owners of that Bibles also believed JESUS IS GOD, but see how they translated that verse?

    And they similarly translated Revelations 22:16 the same way, because the Hebrew meaning of the word ROOT and the meaning of the word OFFSPRING were just the same:

    Rev 22:16 "I, Jesus, have sent my angel to tell you these things for the churches. I AM THE DESCENDANT FROM THE FAMILY OF DAVID. I am the bright morning star." [ERV]

    Rev 22:16 "I, Jesus, have sent my angel to announce these things to you in the churches. I AM DESCENDED FROM THE FAMILY OF DAVID; I am the bright morning star." [GNB]

    Rev 22:16 “I am Jesus! And I am the one who sent my angel to tell all of you these things for the churches. I AM DAVID'S GREAT DESCENDANT, and I am also the bright morning star.”[CEV]


    What more could I say ha? Nothing could be simpler than that.

    So if someone ask you to make a FAMILY TREE of your FAMILY, where will you put the NAME of your PARENTS? Was it in the top of the tree or at the ROOTS?

    Jesus is at the ROOT of David’s Family Tree…so where he would be? TOP or BOTTOM?

    Even an elementary student could answer that.

    ‘Till next time…bukas naman iyong iba, hehehe

    ReplyDelete
  47. Peter... for your case of Titus 2:13:

    You assert and made a conclusion on this subject by combining (in the minds of the reader) Titus 1:4 and Titus 2:13… you even quote Luke 9:26:

    But what will be seen at the Second Coming of Christ?
    Acts 1:11 “… this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.”
    >> There is no one beside Jesus that gone up to heaven aside from the appearing of angels.
    >> And as the angels said, “in like manner”… no need to expound.

    You have tried to create a different picture of this veres:
    Titus 2:13 Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;

    You deliberately create in the minds of the reader a picture of Father and Son coming using different verses. But sorry friend, I also love the word of God.

    What will be seen at His Coming:
    1. The glory of God
    2. The Lord Jesus
    3. Angels

    Glory, means great beauty or splendor : MAGNIFICENCE
    The Second Coming would be of great magnificence, a scenic view that will make one worship God.

    The “LORD” is the one that will appear:
    1Thessalonians 4:16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:

    The “LORD” is the one that came in flesh and seen by the disciples:
    Isaiah 40:3 “The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the LORD…”

    And the “LORD” will come again:
    Revelation 22:20 He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus.

    Regards.... :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Peter of Las Pinas14 March 2012 at 11:14

      The Second coming of our Lord Jesus Christ will be also the appearing of the Glory of the Father, since Jesus will not come in his own glory only but also with the Glory of the Father. [Luke 9:26]

      Even in the Old TAGALOG BIBLE, it’s written “PAGPAPAKITA NG KALUWALHATIAN” [Appearing of the Glory] and not “MALUWALHATING PAGPAPAKITA” [Glorious Appearing] as in the one in the KJV.

      The word God in Titus 2:13, can never pertain also to Jesus, because for Apostle Paul Jesus is not God but man:

      1 Timothy 2:5 “For THERE IS ONE GOD, and ONE MEDIATOR BETWEEN GOD AND MEN, the MAN CHRIST JESUS;” [KJV]

      Jesus is the MEDIATOR Between GOD and MEN, he is in Between

      MEN ===> JESUS [Man] ===> GOD

      So if Jesus is also GOD, then there will be TWO Gods

      MEN ===> JESUS [God] ===> GOD

      Jesus will appear as a GOD mediating for another GOD.

      And the worst case, if we consider Jesus as the ALMIGHTY GOD, then who will be now the mediator?

      A 100% FACT that Apostle Paul do not believe that JESUS IS GOD, so there is no way we should conclude that he is calling Jesus God in Titus 2:13

      For his God is the GOD and FATHER of Jesus Christ as he said in John 20:17:

      Ephesians 1:3 “PRAISE THE GOD AND FATHER OF OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST! Through Christ, God has blessed us with every spiritual blessing that heaven has to offer.” [GWT]

      Ephesians 4:6 “ONE GOD AND FATHER OF ALL, WHO IS ABOVE ALL, AND THROUGH ALL, AND IN YOU ALL.” [KJV]

      I’m sorry ACTS OF LAGUNA, Apostle Paul never acknowledged Jesus the same way you do. I know that’s disappointing because it is really quite difficult for a person whose belief is just based on an INVENTED DOCTRINE to find proofs for it.

      The Bible does not support you on this, I know the one who supports you, a very popular guy.

      Read this:

      "The Council could not agree and after two years, impatient at the delay the Emperor Constantine appeared and addressed the assembly; ORDERING THEM TO AGREE ON THE DIVINITY OF CHRIST ...." [Challenge of a Liberal Faith, page 60]

      It was Emperor Constantine, the main reason why the THE DIVINITY OF CHRIST or the JESUS IS GOD DOCTRINE came into being in the 4th CENTURY. By forcing the Ecumenical Council of Nicea to agree that Jesus is God.

      So it’s not Apostle Paul it’s your Apostle Constantine shares with you in defending this MAN-MADE DOCTRINE.

      Sorry, but the TRUTH really does HURT, especially if you don’t want to accept it, it will cut your skin deep.

      Delete
  48. Peter…. for your case of Revelation 22:16:

    Sorry, when it comes to understanding the word of God, I do not use paraphrase specially when convincing in an argument..

    Revelation 22:16 I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root (G4491) and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.

    G4491
    ῥίζα
    rhiza
    hrid'-zah
    Apparently a primary word; a “root” (literally or figuratively): - root.
    [Strong’s Hebrew and Greek Dictionary]

    You said even a child could easily understand that: (But apparently you don’t)

    You said:
    “So if someone ask you to make a FAMILY TREE of your FAMILY, where will you put the NAME of your PARENTS? Was it in the top of the tree or at the ROOTS?
    Jesus is at the ROOT of David’s Family Tree…so where he would be? TOP or BOTTOM?”

    My Friend, without the root there will be neither branches nor fruits. You are contradicting your own words there my friend. Family tree… nice thou… :)

    You have used a lot of paraphrased reference for Isaiah 11:10, but failed to examine what is written. Root, very simple and plain.

    You said:
    So how come he will be the source now as understood by ACTS OF LAGUNA, it’s clear in this verse that the ROOT mentioned will appear in the future.

    Friend, there is no baby Jesus in heaven, the Birth takes place at Bethlehem not in heaven or in any place and time before Bethlehem. The Bible is composed of supernatural events that our mind cannot comprehend… Jesus is the Root, yet a Branch.. a Lamb, yet a Lion.. a Sacrifice, yet a Priest.. a Word, yet in flesh.. with flesh and bone, yet passed through a closed door… etc. This I cannot explain, but your concern with the Root coming in the future reveals His future manifestation, that’s why some translator paraphrased the verse. (I know you understand it better)

    Regards.... :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Peter of Las Pinas14 March 2012 at 08:32

      @Acts of Laguna

      Paraphrased versions of the Bible, as long it will not distort nor twist the meaning of the verse and it will not contradict other passages can be used. You are avoiding to accept those translations of that verses for a very simple reason, they are against your belief and understanding which of course not necessarily mean you based on facts.

      The Book of Isaiah clearly said that the ROOT will appear in the FUTURE since the verse clearly said:

      Isaiah 11:10 And in that day THERE SHALL BE A ROOT OF JESSE, which shall stand for an ensign of the people; to it shall the Gentiles seek: and his rest shall be glorious. [KJV]

      “THERE SHALL BE”

      That in HEBREW is:

      H1961
      היה
      hâyâh
      haw-yaw'
      A primitive root (compare H1933); TO EXIST, THAT IS, BE or BECOME, come to pass (always emphatic, and not a mere copula or auxiliary): - beacon, X altogether, be (-come, accomplished, committed, like), break, cause, come (to pass), continue, do, faint, fall, + follow, happen, X have, last, pertain, quit (one-) self, require, X use. [Strong’s Hebrew Dictionary]


      The ROOT of JESSE does not yet exist when the prophecy was spoken. So how can you use the meaning of the ROOT = source or origin there for that will distort the meaning.

      The meaning of the Hebrew word SHERESH is BOTTOM, it does not say that it is ORIGIN or SOURCE.

      Your mistake is you are trying to use the meaning of the English word ROOT. When you should have to consider the meaning of the original word used by the Bible which of course in Hebrew.

      And it’s quite obvious why you are avoiding the Hebrew meaning.

      Yes I admit that the word ROOT in English have a meaning of ORIGIN and SOURCE.

      But ROOT could also mean:

      “ROOT: The bottom or lower part of any thing.” [Webster’s 1828 Dictionary]

      Jesus is at the bottom and lower part of David’s Family.

      And that does not contradict any passages from the Bible for that is a consistent fact from OT to NT.

      And in that particular verse in Isaiah 11:10, the meaning of the Hebrew word SHERESH can never be SOURCE or ORIGIN, but BOTTOM or HEEL, because of the phrase “THERE SHALL BE” which proves that the ROOT of Jesse is not the source or ancestor of Jesse but his descendant. There is no way around it my friend.

      Delete
    2. Peter...

      So explain to me this verse:
      Jeremiah 23:5 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute judgment and justice in the earth.

      The Family tree concept: (My elementary days)

      Branch - Jesus
      Trunk2 - David
      Trunk1 - Jesse
      Root - Jesus

      Your Root concept:

      Root1 - Jesse
      Root2 - David
      Root3 - Jesus
      Branch - Jesus?

      Better if you would elaborate.... :)

      Delete
    3. Peter of Las Pinas15 March 2012 at 13:21

      I have made a good response at the BOTTOM, that is SHERESH in HEBREW, in case you wanna know.

      Please when you read it, tell your friend SAINT ANN, not to cover your eyes. hehehehe

      Ooops, Apologies, I mean SATAN.

      Hahahahaha

      Delete
  49. Peter of Las Pinas14 March 2012 at 08:33

    And that’s why you avoid my question:

    ”So if someone ask you to make a FAMILY TREE of your FAMILY, where will you put the NAME of your PARENTS? Was it in the top of the tree or at the ROOTS?
    Jesus is at the ROOT of David’s Family Tree…so where he would be? TOP or BOTTOM?”

    My Friend, without the root there will be neither branches nor fruits. You are contradicting your own words there my friend. Family tree… nice thou… :)


    Without the roots there will be no tree, that’s a fact when we are talking about a LITERAL TREE, but in a FAMILY TREE, your ancestors are listed at the TOP and not at the BOTTOM, DECENDANTS or OFFSPRING are listed at the BOTTOM in Hebrew “SHERESH”, and there is no illogical in that.

    And Jesus is surely at the BOTTOM of the List read Matthew 1:1-17

    But in whatever meaning, the ROOT of DAVID, or ROOT of JESSE does not suggests that Jesus is God. It is just a mere ASSUMPTION of those who believed that Jesus is God.

    For God is the source of all life, and not just a source of a specific Family:

    Numbers 16:22 But Moses and Aaron bowed down with their faces to the ground and said, "O GOD, YOU ARE THE SOURCE OF ALL LIFE. When one of us sins, do you become angry with the whole community?"

    The True God is the source of all living creature, that includes you and me, and including Jesus:

    John 8:42 Jesus told them, "If God were your Father, you would love me. After all, I'm here, and I CAME FROM GOD. I didn't come on my own. Instead, God sent me.” [GWT]

    1 Cor 8:6 “But for us, "THERE IS ONLY ONE GOD, THE FATHER. EVERYTHING CAME FROM HIM, and we live for him. There is only one Lord, Jesus Christ. Everything came into being through him, and we live because of him." [GWT]


    Every living thing came from the ONLY TRUE GOD THE FATHER including JESUS.

    And of course the Anti-Bible and the Anti-Christ would not believe this, and would still insist that Jesus is the source.

    ReplyDelete
  50. Peter of Las Pinas14 March 2012 at 08:54

    Oh, by the way concerning Jesus coming through a closed door, or walking on water, or making a storm stop, etc. ,w ere miracles performed by Jesus while he’s still on earth. And still does not suggest that he is GOD.
    Read this,

    Act 2:22 “Ye men of Israel, hear these words; JESUS OF NAZARETH, A MAN APPROVED OF GOD AMONG YOU BY MIRACLES AND WONDERS AND SIGNS, WHICH GOD DID BY HIM IN THE MIDST OF YOU, as ye yourselves also know:” [KJV]

    Apostle Peter said as I quote again:

    “JESUS OF NAZARETH, A MAN APPROVED OF GOD”

    Approve here in GREEK is “apodeiknumi” which means:

    ἀποδείκνυμι

    apodeiknumi

    Thayer Definition:

    1) to point away from one’s self, to point out, show forth, to expose to view, exhibit

    2) to declare, to show, TO PROVE what kind of person anyone is, TO PROVE by arguments, demonstrate [Thayer’s Greek Definition]


    In other words,

    ”JESUS IS A MAN PROVEN by GOD”

    So why are you proving God the one proven by God as a MAN?

    So those who are insisting that Jesus is God is not only ANTI-CHRIST, they are ANTI-GOD also. Because they defy God by saying that Jesus is God, after God himself already proven Jesus as a MAN.

    All the miracles and wonders that Jesus had done while he was still on earth was the work of God through him.

    For Jesus cannot do anything without the aid of the FATHER:

    John 5:30 “I CAN DO NOTHING OF MY OWN SELF. As I hear, I judge, and My judgment is just, because I DO NOT SEEK MY OWN WILL, BUT THE WILL OF THE FATHER WHO HAS SENT ME.” [Modern King James]

    Jesus cannot do anything by himself without the help of the Father.

    So if we will go back to your argument it would appear then that your Jesus the ALMIGTY GOD, cannot do anything without the help of another ALMIGHTY GOD.

    So you have TWO ALMIGHTY GODS, wow! The more the merrier. Hehehehe.

    ReplyDelete
  51. @ Acts of Laguna,

    I am waiting for an answer, please do not ignore me.

    You said:

    "By the way, the way we see it... he was in a repented situation, kneeling before Christ."

    Where in the Bible we can read that Thomas is kneeling before Christ when he said MY LORD and MY GOD? Can you please quote the verse?

    And you also said:

    "AND Thomas answered..." they're already communicating."

    If they're already communicating, I'm asking you what Thomas said to Jesus prior to the time when he said MY LORD and MY GOD?

    If you were Apostle Thomas who already Jesus taught that the Father is the only True God in John 17:3, and told you that his Father is his God and your God in John 20:17, would you still insist that he is your God even after his resurrection?

    Would you mind answering these please?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jessica... God day.

      Same goes, where in the Bible that Thomas was extremely surprised?

      Anyways when you read again my post where you raised your question, you will find my answer there.

      And Jessica, what is the meaning of "prayer" to you.
      (Not a form of insult, just expounding)

      Lovers can communicate with their eyes, right? That's a form of deep communication.

      Regards..... :)

      Delete
    2. I don't know if an EXCLAMATION POINT would not mean He's surprise.

      John 20:28 Thomas answered him, "My Lord and my God!"

      That is exactly what is written in the Good News Bible.

      There is an EXCLAMATION POINT.

      Now may I have the verse now that says Thomas kneeling or praying in front of Jesus when he said: My Lord and My God?

      Please don't be a comedian, are you trying to tell me that Jesus and Thomas were like lovers that time communicating with their eyes?

      Come on, you are being funny you know?

      Delete
  52. Acts of LAGUNA said:

    “Sorry, when it comes to understanding the word of God, I do not use paraphrase specially when convincing in an argument..”


    Very Clear ha, he said: “I DO NOT USE PARAPHRASE”

    Look at what he said here:

    “Apostle Paul told to the Church in Galatia:
    Galatians 1:12 It wasn't given or taught to me by some mere human. My message came directly from Jesus Christ when he appeared to me. (CEV)
    >> Jesus is not a man the way you understand it, neither He is Man became God as you suppose my belief. He was that God that took on Human flesh to save us.”



    Was this verse not paraphrased?

    Look at the KJV:

    Gal 1:12 “For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.”

    And the CEV:

    Gal 1:12 “It wasn't given or taught to me by some MERE HUMAN. My message CAME DIRECTLY from Jesus Christ WHEN HE APPEARED TO ME.” [CEV]

    Too much words added not in the original Greek.

    So are you really not using a PARAPHRASE?

    I think this is called LYING IN A VERY OBVIOUS DEGREE!

    Hehehehe

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Christian... read again. Don't be too excited..

      Regards... :)

      Delete
    2. Ok remove my excitement and prove to me that the verse you quote is not a PARAPHRASE.

      That I would like to see.

      Delete
  53. Peter… for you concern in Matthew 23:9, John 20:17 and others:

    You quote as an argument:
    Matthew 23:9 “And don't call anyone on earth your father, because YOU HAVE ONLY ONE FATHER, AND HE IS IN HEAVEN.” [GWT]

    You also used this verse as your strong argument that Jesus is a man:
    John 20:17 Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.

    You even said: (March 12)
    “…number one reason, when he said that, he was on Earth and not in Heaven so he is talking about a different being which is in heaven and not himself.”

    But Jesus said:
    John 3:13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, EVEN THE SON OF MAN WHICH IS IN HEAVEN.

    Even Apostle Paul said:
    Galatians 1:1 Paul, an apostle, (not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, AND God the Father, who raised him from the dead;)

    Your argument focus on the SONSHIP of Jesus as a MAN, so I’ll go with it…

    The Bible said:
    Luke 1:35 “.. that HOLY THING which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.”
    The writer used a simple word yet vital in understanding the word of God.

    Holy Thing - because it was separated, sanctified by God (Messiah)
    Son of God - because God Himself make it possible.
    Son of Man - because the vessel is from the seed of a man.

    Now, can we use the title “son of God” to any Christian? The answer is yes, the Bible said they are the sons of God.

    And Jesus also said:
    John 2:19 Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this TEMPLE, and in three days I will raise it up.

    Again, can we also use the term “Temple of God” referring to any Christian? The answer is yes, the Bible said that.

    But one of the great difference of Jesus from any MAN is His authority to raise Himself from the dead. Can any true Christian (sons of God) raise himself after experiencing death? No one…

    Question: Who raised Jesus from the dead?... the Bible said it is GOD.
    Acts 3:26 “Unto you first God, having raised up his Son Jesus..”
    Acts 4:10 “..Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead..”
    Acts 13:30 But God raised him from the dead:

    Or is it Jesus Himself? Think…
    John 2:19 “Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I WILL RAISE IT UP.”

    Going back to Luke:
    Luke 1:35 “.. that HOLY THING which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.”
    > The Holy Thing is the earthly Tabernacle of God made not by any human means but by God Himself.

    As the Bible said:
    Acts 7:48 Howbeit the most High dwelleth not in temples made with hands; as saith the prophet,

    In the Old Testament, God commanded Moses to build Him a Tabernacle so that He may dwell with His people.

    Exodus 25:8-9 “And let them make me a sanctuary; that I may dwell among them…”

    Do you think that the unchanging God did not desire to do it again in the days of the apostles?

    Well the prophesy said Jesus is the Emmanuel… “God with us”…

    Regards..... :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Peter of Las Pinas15 March 2012 at 13:24

      This is a good topic, don't worry I will put you in an EXTREME SURPRISE like Doubting Thomas when I discuss this.

      See yah!

      Delete
  54. For your response in Acts 7:59
    Acts 7:59 “And they stoned Stephen, calling upon God, and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.” [KJV]

    >> It doesn’t prove that Jesus is a man, but it does prove that JESUS IS ENOUGH!!

    As Apostle John said:
    1John 2:23 If we reject the Son, we reject the Father. But if we say that we accept the Son, we have the Father. (CEV)

    And as Jesus have said:
    John 14:9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?

    A dying Stephen, given a chance to see heaven, just called Jesus (a man) and not God the Father?
    Not exactly, Stephen knows whom to call, he called on his Emmanuel….

    Man seek his parents before he dies as they say, true Christians seek Jesus before they die.

    JESUS truly is the EVERLASTING FATHER!!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Peter of Las Pinas15 March 2012 at 05:04

      Do not be like a turn table my friend, I already responded the True meaning of John 14:9

      I guess you are not reading my post, aren't you?

      Scroll up my friend

      Delete
    2. Peter of Las Pinas15 March 2012 at 05:58

      Still doesn't prove that Acts 7:59 of the KJV is a CORRECT TRANSLATION,

      Nice try thou...hehehehehe

      Delete
  55. You said: (March 10)
    Becuase it’s very clear that PELE-JOEZ-EL-GIBBOR-ABI-AD-SAR-SHALOM, is not His Title. It does not denotes the CHILD’S nature or the POWER or AUTHORITY that he possess, it is simply the meaning of that LONG HEBREW NAME. The Jews understood that it’s a name that’s why they maintained the Hebrew words, and only TRANSLITERATED it and not TRANSLATED it in English.

    You even quote this verse:
    Isaiah 9:6 (9:5) “For a child is born unto us, a son is given unto us; and the government is upon his shoulder; and his name is called PELE- JOEZ-EL-GIBBOR-ABI-AD-SAR-SHALOM;” [Jewish Publication Society Bible]

    The Jewish publication and OTHER JEWS believe that JESUS is a MAN that’s why they also denied this, same as you.

    You said: (March 7)
    “Sinabi lang iyong meaning nung NAME, at hindi sinabing si Cristo ang Diyos na sumasaatin. Konklusiyon niyo lang iyon at wala sa talata.”
    “Meaning lang iyan nung Pangalang Immanuel:”

    Peter means “Rock” or “Stone”…. It is only the meaning of the name, nothing more. Why? because it is your parent that give you that name. But it is different when GOD gave the NAME.

    God change the name of Abram (given by his parents) to Abraham, which means “Father of a multitude”…
    Question: IS HE NOT????

    God change the name of Jacob (given by his parents) to Israel, which means “Prince of God”
    Question: IS HE NOT????

    God change the name of Lucifer (God-given name) to Satan, which means “Adversary of God”
    Question: IS HE NOT???

    GOD did not give NAME for the purpose of the MEANING, but a declaration…

    Regards.... :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Peter of Las Pinas15 March 2012 at 07:28

      God said to Isaiah:

      Isaiah 8:3 “And I went unto the prophetess; and she conceived, and bare a son. Then said the LORD to me, Call his name MAHERSHALALHASHBAZ.” [KJV]

      What is the meaning of “MAHERSHALALHASHBAZ the name God gave to Isaiah’s son.”?

      Isaiah 8:3 “Some time later my wife became pregnant. When our son was born, the LORD said to me, "Name him 'QUICK-LOOT-FAST-PLUNDER.'” [GNB]

      You can start now proving how that name is identical to Isaiah’s son’s character and nature…

      You can start proving that the son of Prophet Isaiah became a THIEF

      IS HE OR IS HE NOT? HEHEHEHE

      I will wait for your lovely answer.

      Regards also.

      Delete
    2. Peter...

      God used Mahershalalhashbaz as an emblem (indicator, a sign) of the Prophesy regarding Damascus and Samaria. This is to prove that God’s Word is precise. As the Bible said…

      Isaiah 8:4 For before the child shall have knowledge to cry, My father, and my mother, the riches of Damascus and the spoil of Samaria shall be taken away before the king of Assyria.

      Question: Was the riches of Damascus and Samaria not taken away? Does God lie?
      Your question “Is he become a thief” is a misguided thought…. Sorry.

      Same with the archangel named Michael, which means “Who is like God?”
      Question: Is there is? Who can create such beauty? No one, God is declaring His omnipotence.

      Josiah means “ the fire of the Lord”. Why? Because he trampled and burn down Idols..
      2Kings 23:15 Josiah also tore down the place of worship in Bethel, which had been built by King Jeroboam son of Nebat, who led Israel into sin. Josiah pulled down the altar, broke its stones into pieces, and pounded them to dust; he also burned the image of Asherah.
      Question: Is Josiah Not?

      Adam (earthy) because he can from the earth…. Is Adam Not???

      John (The Baptist) means “the grace or mercy of the Lord”. Why? Because the Bible said…
      Luke 1:7 And they had no child, because that Elisabeth was barren, and they both were now well stricken in years.
      Question: …. Is God Not???

      Cyrus means “Miserable”, “Ravenous” if you may. Why? See Webster definition…
      2 : urgently eager for food : craving for satisfaction or gratification *ravenous appetite* *a ravenous boy* *this ravenous desire*
      synonyms see VORACIOUS
      Question: … Is Cyrus Not??

      I don’t know if you use your Bible only as a reference for your belief and not the source of what we should believe. You’re making fun of the Bible when you are disagreeing with the subject. Maybe it’s your way of not accepting the Word of God…. Sad :(

      Delete
    3. Peter of Las Pinas16 March 2012 at 23:19

      I just want to remind you ACTS OF LAGUNA that you said this:

      "Kaya nga hindi komo ganun na ang kahulugan ng isang PANGALAN ang ibig sabihin noon ay iyon na rin ang kalagayan nung tinatawag sa PANGALANG iyon."

      Yes.. But when God himself gives the Name.. it is!!..



      It’s very clearly here that you are proving that if God gives the Name, that would definitely denotes the nature of the one given by that name.

      Now that’s why I ask you the question to prove that the name given by God “MAHERSHALALHASHBAZ” is actually the nature of Isaiah’s son.

      Because you said very clearly:

      “Yes.. But when God himself gives the Name.. it is!!..”

      You actually proved that when God gave the name it denotes the nature of the person that bears the name, right?

      God gave that name, isn’t it? So it’s time for you to do your homework.

      Prove to me that “MAHERSHALALHASHBAZ” which means “QUICK-LOOT-FAST-PLUNDER.” is actually refers to the nature of the child that bears the name.

      Look’s like you are the one making FUN of yourself.


      And another thing? You said:

      “God change the name of Lucifer (God-given name) to Satan, which means “Adversary of God”
      Question: IS HE NOT???”


      Can you show me a verse in the Bible where you actually based that? Go on I’m really curious where you got that story.

      Delete
    4. Peter, below comment is out of our subject, i just want to know more.

      The topic "Kung Bakit Dapat Paniwalaan at Sundin ang Biblia" from this blog caught my attention..

      It says from #18:
      18. Paano ba ang tamang paggamit ng Biblia?
      Ang paggamit ng salita ng Panginoon ay: “dito'y kaunti, doo'y kaunti”, ibig sabihin babasa ka ng kaunti dito at babasa ka ng kaunti doon. AT HINDI NA KAILANGANG BASAHING LAHAT. Kumuha tayo ng halimbawa ng paggamit sa Biblia:

      Aabutin tayo ng ilang linggo, o buwan pa siguro kung babasahin natin ng tuloy-tuloy ang Biblia, dahil ang kasagutan ay nasa kahuli-hulihang aklat, ang Apocalypsis, at doon lamang natin mababasa na ang ahas ay ang Diablo at Satanas.

      I don't want to conclude but when I'm attending an INC held Bible study, never did they encourage me to read the Bible.

      I don't want to reason you out with this subject, I'm just disappointed how you handle our case with the name "“MAHERSHALALHASHBAZ”. It seem like your not reading the explanation of God in that verses...

      Regards....

      Delete
    5. Peter of Las Pinas17 March 2012 at 12:26

      I know what that verse mean, hindi ko i-oopen sa iyo ang tungkol sa NAME na iyan kung hindi ko alam ang talagang ibig sabihin nung verse, remember I am not you, maraming beses ko nang napatunayan na palpak ka pagdating sa pag-unawa ng talata.

      I have read the Bible almost a lot, and a minister told me to do so. Hindi iyan binabasa ng parang komiks o magasin, mauunawaan mo lang iyan kapag may nagturo sa iyo. Gaano ka ba katagal na umatend ng Bible Study? Kung hindi nila nasabi sa pagtuturo nila, itinanong mo ba sa ministro? Did you ask them? I bet you don’t.

      You are the one in trouble here, not me. Aminin mo na lang na NAIPIT KA SA ISYUNG ITO, dahil very obvious na hindi mo alam ang mga sinasabi mo.
      You said as I quote:

      "Kaya nga hindi komo ganun na ang kahulugan ng isang PANGALAN ang ibig sabihin noon ay iyon na rin ang kalagayan nung tinatawag sa PANGALANG iyon."

      Yes.. But when God himself gives the Name.. it is!!..


      You are proving by this statement of yours, na kapag ang isang pangalan ay bigay ng Diyos, the name denotes the nature of the person that was given by that name.

      Hindi naman ako ipinanganak na Inglisero, pero hindi ako mangmang para hindi maunawa ang gusto mong patunayan sa sinabi mong iyan.

      Kaya nga tinatanong kita about “MAHERSHALALHASHBAZ” if that name denotes the nature of Isaiah’s son?

      You are the one who said that it is, if the name is given by God, Since that name is given by God, so the burden of proof is on your shoulder.

      That’s why you need to prove to me that “MAHERSHALALHASHBAZ”’s meaning refers to the child’s NATURE that was given by that name.
      At ang tanging nasabi mo na lang ay:

      I don't want to reason you out with this subject, I'm just disappointed how you handle our case with the name "“MAHERSHALALHASHBAZ”. It seem like your not reading the explanation of God in that verses...

      There is a difference between “YOU DON’T WANT TO REASON OUT” and “YOU CAN’T REASON OUT”.

      Kasi halatang-halata na naipit ka, kasi iyong ipinaliwanag mong ito:
      ”God used Mahershalalhashbaz as an emblem (indicator, a sign) of the Prophesy regarding Damascus and Samaria.”

      Maliwanag mong kinontra sarili mo niyan kaibigan. Pinatunayan mo ngayon na hindi totoo ang sinabi mong:

      Yes.. But when God himself gives the Name.. it is!!..

      Dahil pinatunayan mo na hindi tumutukoy sa NATURE nung bata ang “MAHERSHALALHASHBAZ” kundi ito ay symbol or emblem ng Prophecy ng Dios regarding Damascus and Samaria.

      Kaya BOKYA ka, kitang-kita ebidensiya na sumemplang ka rito.

      Ikaw ang gumawa ng kumunoy na kinahulugan mo.

      Oh what about the one I ask you to show me from the Bible that says, God replaced the name LUCIFER with the name SATAN?

      Sige na, I’m just curious, san’ mo ba talaga nakuha ang kuwento mong iyan?

      Iyan ba hindi mo kikibuin?

      Delete
  56. Peter of Las Pinas15 March 2012 at 05:05

    @Acts of Laguna,

    Hey look, I have a surprise for you regarding the meaning of the Greek word ῥίζα
    “RHIZA” or ROOT in English, which appeared in Revelations 22:16:

    Rev 22:16 “I[G1473] Jesus[G2424] have sent[G3992] mine[G3450] angel[G32] to testify[G3140] unto you[G5213] these things[G5023] in[G1909] the[G3588] churches.[G1577] I[G1473] am[G1510] the[G3588] ROOT[G4491] and[G2532] the[G3588] offspring[G1085] of David,[G1138] and the [G3588] bright[G2986] and[G2532] morning[G3720] star.[G792]” [KJV with Strong’s Concordance]

    Here’s the meaning from the Thayer’s Greek Definitions:
    ῥίζα
    rhiza
    Thayer Definition:
    1) a root
    2) that which like a root springs from a root, a sprout, shoot
    3) metaphorically offspring, progeny”


    Look at the third definition which says

    “METAPHORICALLY OFFSPRING, PROGENY.”

    Very clear that the Greek word RHIZA [ROOT] is a metaphor for OFFSPRING.

    And what is the meaning of the word PROGENY?

    Progeny
    PROG'ENY, n. [L.progenies, from progignor.] OFFSPRING; RACE; CHILDREN; DESCENDANTS OF THE HUMAN KIND, or offspring of other animals; as the progeny of a king; the progeny of Adam; the progeny of beasts or fowls; a word of general application. [Webster’s 1828 Dictionary]



    So it was never wrong to translate it as DESCENDANT or OFFSPRING after all, for it is the Greek word’s real meaning.

    So whether we use the Hebrew Word or the Greek Word of ROOT, they do not mean the way you understood it.

    Sorry, YOU’RE WRONG!

    Now, it is more clearer that you do not have a deep understanding of the verse’s real meaning because you are using the definition of the English word ROOT and neglected the Greek word RHIZA’s true meaning.

    That’s a big mistake…and that’s normal for people like you who believed in the MAN-MADE DOCTRINE that JESUS IS GOD.

    I am not surprise. Hehehehehe

    ReplyDelete
  57. Peter of Las Pinas15 March 2012 at 13:17

    @Acts of Laguna,

    If your teacher would ask you to make a Family Tree of Jesus Christ, and you’re really going to submit this:

    “The Family tree concept: (My elementary days)

    Branch - Jesus
    Trunk2 - David
    Trunk1 - Jesse
    Root – Jesus”


    You think she or he will give you a good grade on this one?

    Your teacher might ask you afterwards, “do you believe in reincarnation?” Hehehehe.

    Because that idea my friend is HINDUISM in nature, a pagan religion, so much like one of those religions that influenced the Catholic Church to come up with an idea that JESUS IS GOD in the Fourth Century [325A.D.].

    Now I can see there is a slight difference with your belief with the Catholic Church and the Protestants, to them there is ONLY ONE JESUS, but for you, there are TWO.

    Now I’m convinced that there is a difference at least, hehehehe.

    If your teacher see that there are two Jesus there, what would she think? You think she will tell you: What a Genius Boy!?

    If I were going to make a FAMILY TREE of course, I would not think of it is a LITERAL TREE. For that is RIDICULOUS and act of GRAVE STUPIDITY.

    Of course the first thing I would do is to read Matthew 1:1-17, list down all their names from TOP to BOTTOM. ANCESTORS at the TOP, DESCENDANTS or OFFSPRINGS at the Bottom. So much similar to what this LINK is showing:

    ABRAHAM’S FAMILY TREE

    And I’m sure I would definitely have a Good grade, maybe an A or a STAR!

    Now let us go with your request to explain Jeremiah 23:5, please if you don’t have a KJV with Strong’s Concordance, try to download it from www.esword.com ok?

    Let us quote the verse:

    Jer 23:5 “Behold,H2009 the daysH3117 come,H935 saithH5002 the LORD,H3068 that I will raiseH6965 unto DavidH1732 a righteousH6662 BRANCH,H6780 and a KingH4428 shall reignH4427 and prosper,H7919 and shall executeH6213 judgmentH4941 and justiceH6666 in the earth.H776 [KJV with Strong’s Numbers]

    ReplyDelete
  58. Peter of Las Pinas15 March 2012 at 13:18

    The Hebrew word for BRANCH is

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

    H6780
    צמח
    tsemach
    BDB Definition:
    1) SPROUT, growth, branch
    1a) sprouting, growth, SPROUT
    1b) growth (of process)
    1c) SPROUT, SHOOT (OF MESSIAH FROM DAVIDIC TREE)
    [Brown Driver Briggs’ Hebrew Definitions]

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

    The Hebrew word TSEMACH stands for Sprout or Shoot, and it’s definitely synonymous with the Greek word RHIZA:

    -----------------------------
    ῥίζα
    rhiza
    Thayer Definition:
    1) a root
    2) that which like a root springs from a root, A SPROUT, SHOOT
    3) metaphorically offspring, progeny”

    [Thayer’s Greek Definition]
    -------------------------------

    Very simple:

    Hebrew TSEMACH = Greek RHIZA = SPROUT or SHOOT

    Both of them means DESCENDANTS.

    That’s why there is a Bible that translated it as such:

    Jeremiah 23:5 “The LORD says, "The time is coming when I will choose as king a righteous DESCENDANT of David. That king will rule wisely and do what is right and just throughout the land.” [GNB]

    Ok so always remember children, when making a FAMILY TREE, the ANCESTORS should be on the TOP, DESCENDANTS and OFFSPRINGS should be at the BOTTOM that is SHERESH [שׁרשׁ] in Hebrew. Don’t forget ok?

    An Elementary student surely will never forget that….hehehehehe, I don’t know about you.

    ReplyDelete
  59. Peter…

    Jesus is…………

    The First and the Last .......(Revelation 2:8)
    The WORD .................... (John 1:1)
    Ancient of Days ............ .(Daniel 7:9)
    Before Abraham ...............(John 8:58)
    The Rock in the Wilderness ...(1Corinthians 10:4)

    Don’t make fun of the Bible; it’s the source of our Salvation.

    Regards....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Peter of Las Pinas16 March 2012 at 23:30

      I will respond to those Catholic Favorite verses, in my next post, and I will prove to you that you are just having WRONG UNDERSTANDING on those verses.

      By the way you are using JOHN 8:58,which said "Before Abraham I am", I think you need to change now your FAMILY TREE that you will submit to your teacher. You need to put now another Jesus before Abraham's name, now you will have THREE JESUS. Hehehehe, that would be really fun, because you have now a TRINITY which are THREE JESUS.

      Delete
    2. Peter....

      Our case:
      Revelation 22:16 I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.

      Your stand:
      Revelation 22:16 I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root [Descendant] AND the offspring [Descendant] of David, and the bright and morning star.

      My Stand:
      Revelation 22:16 I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root [Source, Beginning] and the offspring [Descendant, Branch] of David, and the bright and morning star.

      As Jesus said:
      Revelation 22:12 And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be. v13 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.

      Jesus is the Root, the Alpha, the Beginning, and the First. What you’re doing is a deliberate cancellation from the Word of God.

      If I will add the names of Isaac, Jacob and others, then there will be more than three Jesus? Hate to say this but you’re acting like a child… very childish.

      Sometimes too much decoration destroys the beauty, worst.. intentionally...

      Delete
    3. Peter of Las Pinas17 March 2012 at 12:32

      Our case:
      Revelation 22:16 “I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.”

      My stand:
      Revelation 22:16 “I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root [Descendant] AND the offspring [Descendant] of David, and the bright and morning star.”

      Because the GREEK WORD “RHIZA” means DESCENDANT. Can you show me a Greek Dictionary that says this word means: SOURCE or ORIGIN?

      Wala ka namang pruweba paanong magiging tama ang stand mo.

      Your Stand:
      Revelation 22:16 “I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root [Source, Beginning] and the offspring [Descendant, Branch] of David, and the bright and morning star.”

      You stick with your ENGLISH UNDERSTANDING of the word “ROOT” and very clearly denying the meaning of the GREEK WORD “RHIZA”.

      Huwag kang makulit, hindi nagsasalita ng English si Apostol Juan na sumulat ng Revelations ano?

      That’s why you need to know the meaning in Greek and not in English. Huwag mong pairalin ang Colonial mentality mo. Kunsabagay, marunong ka namang magtagalog eh, pero mas gusto mo mag-English, kaya tuloy kataku-takot na semplang ang inaabot mo eh.

      I think you really want to take HUMILIATION as your VITAMINS. Hehehehe

      Up next, your wrong understanding about ALPHA and OMEGA…

      Delete
    4. Peter, I don't feel humiliated... But if you feel comfortable thinking that way, suit yourself. Sometimes people do that for whatever reasons, just like Floyd Mayweather.

      Now, at least, we have a direction, a clear understanding of what we believed in. I leave this topic [Revelation 22:16] open for readers / visitors, not as judge but as seekers of truth.

      In regards of my selection of language... I believe that not all readers are Filipino, neither know how to read tagalog. It's best this way, ...I suppose.

      Regards.... :)

      Delete
    5. Of course there is no way you can respond to that topic anymore. Dahil wala kang lusot diyan.

      It is evident to us who have adequate proofs in this issue.

      We judge according to whom carries the truth and backed up by proofs.

      Yours were Just speculations and assumptions, and worst of all WRONG INTERPRETATIONS, and also using of MISTRANSLATED VERSES.

      Mabuhay ang IGLESIA NI CRISTO...

      Delete
    6. Teka muna ayawan na ba?

      Hinihintay ko yung sagot niya dun sa kung saan mababasa sa Bible iyong. Pinalitan ng Diyos ang pangalan ni LUCIFER ng SATANAS eh.

      Would you mind giving as the verse?

      Where is that in the Bible? That God changed the name LUCIFER to SATAN?

      Please respond ACTS OF LAGUNA.

      Delete
  60. Peter of Las Pinas17 March 2012 at 14:42

    @ Acts of Laguna,

    Before I proceed with my explanation regarding your wrong understanding of the ALPHA and OMEGA. I have a question for you my friend:

    You are using the principle of Logic known as PARALLELISM:

    Since God have a title ALPHA and OMEGA and Jesus have the same title ALPHA and OMEGA also, therefore God and Jesus have the SAME STATE OF BEING OR NATURE.

    So as your conclusion based on Human wisdom: “JESUS IS the ALMIGHTY GOD”.

    Definitely that phrase is not in the Bible from Beginning to End.

    Well, I want you to look at this one:

    Lucifer is known as “THE BRIGHT MORNING STAR”:

    Isaiah 14:12-13 “You, THE BRIGHT MORNING STAR, have fallen from the sky! You brought down other nations; now you are brought down. You said to yourself, "I'll climb to heaven and place my throne above the highest stars. I'll sit there with the gods far away in the north.” [CEV]

    And so as Jesus:

    Revelations 22:16 "I, Jesus, have sent my angel to announce these things to you in the churches. I am descended from the family of David; i am THE BRIGHT MORNING STAR." [GNB]


    Now look at this, your ALMIGHTY GOD JESUS CHRIST is using a TITLE similar to the title SATAN has, as the “THE BRIGHT MORNING STAR”

    Wouldn’t that appear that SATAN is also the ALMIGHTY GOD?

    Same TITLE, same STATE OF BEING or NATURE, right?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nice one Bro. Pete,

      I would like to see how MR.ACTS OF LAGUNA, will respond on this one?

      God bless to all brethrens all over the world.

      Delete
  61. to ACTS OF LAGUNA,

    di ka nakalusot, hehehe
    MagpaDOKTRINA ka na lang kaya...

    +brainsalad+

    ReplyDelete
  62. Peter and Christian...

    Lucifer, Satan and Devil speak of the same angel.
    Same goes to Jacob and Israel which speaks of the same person.
    Now, can I still use the name Jacob? Yes of course, the Bible does that.

    Matthew 22:32 I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of JACOB? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.

    Jacob means “Supplanter” (- one who wrongfully or illegally seizes and holds the place of another). If God did not changed the name of Jacob BEFORE his TRIBE seized Canaan. Then, what would God be? He is the One that promised them Canaan. Canaanites was wrongfully seized if they bear the name JACOB, but as a rightful owner because God, creator of heaven and earth claim them as His sons, giving them His Name. Name is of great importance to God, as the Bible said:

    Revelation 2:17 “.. To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the hidden manna, and will give him a white stone, and in the stone A NEW NAME written, which no man knoweth saving he that receiveth it.
    >> If name is not important, why change?

    Lucifer means “Morning Star”… same as other angels…
    Job 38:7 When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?
    >> They are all created beings. As the Bible said:
    Isaiah 14:12 “How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, SON of the morning!...”

    Your Question:
    “Wouldn’t that appear that SATAN is also the ALMIGHTY GOD?”

    God certainly appears in the form of angel, during the time of Abraham [Genesis 18-19] and to Jacob [Genesis 32] as an angelic man.

    As the Bible goes:
    Genesis 32:24 And Jacob was left alone; and there wrestled a MAN with him until the breaking of the day.

    Genesis 35:9 “And God appeared unto Jacob again….”. v10 And God said unto him, Thy name is Jacob: thy name shall not be called any more Jacob, but Israel shall be thy name: and he called his name Israel. v11 And God said unto him, I AM GOD ALMIGHTY:

    Genesis 32:30 And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel: for I HAVE SEEN GOD FACE TO FACE, and my life is preserved.

    Hosea 12:4 Yea, he had power over the ANGEL, and prevailed: he wept, and made supplication unto him: HE FOUND HIM IN BETHEL, and there he spake with us;
    Hosea 12:5 Even the LORD God of hosts; the LORD is his memorial.

    But that Great and merciful God appeared once again, not in the form of angel, or a full-grown angelic man, but in flesh… To save humanity.
    Hebrews 2:16 For verily he took not on him the nature of ANGELS; but he took on him THE SEED OF ABRAHAM.

    Jesus is the promised seed, the manifestation of God in the flesh..

    Genesis 3:15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

    Romans 16:20 AND THE GOD OF PEACE SHALL BRUISE SATAN under your feet shortly. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you. Amen.

    Jesus is the Prince of Peace, the God of Peace, the Mighty God, the revelation of the Name written in Isaiah 9:6…. The Everlasting Father, The Almighty God in the flesh.

    Philippians 2:7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:

    Now for your concern, you asked:
    “Same TITLE, same STATE OF BEING or NATURE, right?”

    Question:
    If you found yourself inside the middle of the tunnel, and found at both ends a light. Would you tell me that both paths go the same direction? You’re comparing God to Satan!!

    Anyways, I know what you’re up to. .. Question:
    Would you call the enemy of God “Lucifer” [Morning star] knowing that he was kicked out from heaven?

    When somebody talked about Lucifer, or Satan or the Devil, I know that they speak of the same being that rebels against God. But never would I address THAT BEING “Lucifer”, he’s not worth it. And the Lord Jesus did not address him that way.

    Regards...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Peter of Las Pinas18 March 2012 at 13:10

      So you are now admitting that it does not necessarily means that a TWO BEINGS having the same TITLE could have the same STATE OF BEING or NATURE, can you confirm this?

      YES or NO.

      Please reply.

      Delete
    2. Ako din magtatanong:

      Where in the Bible we can read that God changed the name LUCIFER to SATAN?

      Verse and Chapter?

      Was this your invention or not? Hehehehe

      Delete
    3. Please answer this question:

      If Jesus is the ALMIGHTY GOD to you, who is the FATHER of Jesus Christ to you?

      I need an honest to Goodness answer.

      Delete
    4. Peter...

      How many "Almighty God" is there?.. There is only ONE!
      How many "Morning Star" are there?.. Cannot be numbered!

      How many person named Peter?.. A lot!
      How many person named Jesus?.. A lot!
      How many person named Jesus that died on the cross?.. One!
      There is only One God.. and that God manifest in the Flesh!

      How many person with Title Governor? A lot!
      How many Imelda Marcos with Title Governor? One!
      How many are called "Father"?.. A lot!
      How many are called "the Everlasting Father"?.. Only One!

      Who can claim that He is the First and the Last?.. Only God!
      Who can claim that He is the Alpha and Omega?.. Only God!

      YES or NO?.. nice...

      Delete
    5. Peter of Las Pinas18 March 2012 at 15:13

      Your question:

      "Would you call the enemy of God “Lucifer” [Morning star] knowing that he was kicked out from heaven?"

      The answer from the Bible:

      Isaiah 14:12 "How art thou fallen from heaven, O LUCIFER, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!"[KJV]

      When he was called LUCIFER at this instance, he was already kicked out from Heaven.

      See the words?

      "How art thou fallen from heaven, O LUCIFER,"

      Baka gusto mo tagalugin ko pa para maintindihan mo. Hehehehe

      Delete
    6. You said,

      "How many "Almighty God" is there?.. There is only ONE!"


      If there is ONLY ONE MIGHTY GOD, and that is Jesus.

      That would make His Father not an ALMIGHTY GOD, can you confirm?

      I can see you are avoiding my question.

      Delete
    7. I will ask you my friend to show us a verse.

      Where in the Bible we can read this phrase:

      "THERE IS ONLY ONE ALPHA AND OMEGA"?

      Quote the verse and paste it here.


      I am still waiting for the verse regarding the name of LUCIFER changed by GOD in to Satan.

      Ilang beses na iyan, ayaw mo pa ring kibuin.

      Delete
    8. Peter, without harming the Word of God, I will replace "Lucifer" with "Satan" and "Devil"

      Isaiah 14:12 "How art thou fallen from heaven, O LUCIFER, son of the morning!..."

      Isaiah 14:12 "How art thou fallen from heaven, O SATAN, son of the morning!..."

      Isaiah 14:12 "How art thou fallen from heaven, O DEVIL, son of the morning!..."

      What is much appropriate? 2nd? 3rd?

      Friend this is a literary style. The writer emphasized the height of the fall of Satan, from the grandest position as an Angel to becoming an enemy of God.

      Delete
    9. Peter of Las Pinas19 March 2012 at 08:48

      You said:

      “Peter, without harming the Word of God, I will replace "Lucifer" with "Satan" and "Devil"

      Now I know where you got the idea that God replaced the name LUCIFER into SATAN, it is not really God who did that, it is YOU. Hehehehe.

      You’re playing God!

      And you have the guts to ask me

      “What is much appropriate?”

      Do you think what you have just done here is an appropriate thing to do? And you are not harming the WORD of GOD?

      Because Isaiah never used the word SATAN there, for LUCIFER is a Latin Word for “MORNING STAR” which is in Hebrew:

      ------------------------
      H1966
      הילל
      hêylêl
      hay-lale'
      From H1984 (in the sense of BRIGHTNESS); the MORNING STAR: - LUCIFER.
      [Strong’s Hebrew Dictionary]

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

      See, even this Hebrew dictionary did not suggested the word SATAN in the definition. Because the word used in the original Hebrew is hêylêl which means “MORNING STAR”, and definitely not equivalent to the word “SATAN”.

      For your information, the word SATAN is an original Hebrew word שׂטן
      śâṭân
      , and it appeared 19 times in the Old Testament, and definitely not in Isaiah 14:12

      You are the one who said that SATAN means:

      “Adversary of God”

      Can you explain how the phrase “MORNING STAR” be equivalent to “ADVERSARY OF GOD” or “SATAN”.?

      Since to you “MORNING STAR” = “SATAN” and “DEVIL”

      Let us use your argument with this one:

      Rev 22:16 "I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give this testimony to you for the churches. I am the root and descendant of David. I am the BRIGHT MORNING STAR." [GWT]

      Following your equation this would be then:

      Rev 22:16 "I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give this testimony to you for the churches. I am the root and descendant of David. I am the DEVIL."

      Rev 22:16 "I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give this testimony to you for the churches. I am the root and descendant of David. I am the SATAN."

      So do you think your analysis and substitution tactics is APPROPRIATE?

      Of course The answer is a Big NO!

      Don’t play God, ok?

      Ipit ka na kasi, NAGPAPALUSOT ka pa eh, pinaka maganda kasi huwag ka na lang kumibo, hehehehe

      You’re already flooded this blog of your AWESOME DISPLAY of your IGNORANCE

      Delete
    10. Now I know why many times now he cannot give us a verse regarding what he said that God changed the name LUCIFER into SATAN.

      It is because he is the God who had done that. Hehehehe.

      Very clever!

      I think ACTS OF LAGUNA here is really GOD manifested in the Flesh. But not his God Jesus Christ, but Lucifer.

      Hahahahahahahahahahaha!

      Delete
    11. Peter and Christian, may the light of the Gospel shine upon you.

      Honestly, when I'm reading your response, I remember Catherine. She asked me, "What is your motive?, Why are you doing this?".

      I asked myself, "Why do I still keep on answering this blog as if I have an audience?.. Thou I've already watch INC style of debate, I still insist on answering knowing how will it end, crowd cheering as the minister makes his rebuttal.

      But I also asked myself, "How can I minister the Word of God in my current situation?"... I thought maybe this blog is the answer. [I cannot go out yet but internet is in]

      Would I silence myself knowing that some people might not know what they are in to? On the other hand, I don't want to be called "Thou wicked and slothful servant"

      You're maybe great in twisting topic, able to delude some readers.. worst your own brethren, but I'm not seeking man's favor either applaud from any... [which is typical in any INC held debate]. But I'm all for truth. The truth really hurts Peter, some people cover their struggle with laughable behavior. I suggest you to face it as a man, not as clown covered with paints. Don't fool yourself.

      Regards.....

      Delete
    12. Peter of Las Pinas19 March 2012 at 17:40

      Our motive is to defend our Faith, your motive is to convince us that your belief is the Truth and ours is Wrong.

      This is not a walk in the Park my Friend, ang mga kausap mo dito malalim ang aral na tinanggap, at hindi mo basta-basta mababali ang aming paniniwala.

      We should put you to the test as the Bible said:

      1 John 4:1 "Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits, whether they are from God; for many false prophets have gone forth into the world." [LITV]

      So you need to face the consequences.

      This is not gonna be easy my friend. Because we are not like a child easily persuaded by a weak argument.

      I'm sorry it is us who should be disappointed. Because I thought we could get something good from you.

      You did not come here to search for the Truth, you come here to insist to us your belief is the Truth.

      Kita mo kahit sinasagot na iyong mga argumento mo, you still keepin' on repeating the same things.

      You are not accepting our explanations, and you are expecting us to accept yours?

      I'm sorry my friend you are knocking at the wrong door.

      Delete
  63. oh my.... it all end up here with Mr. ACT OF LAGUNA, sukol na sukol ka na, pano na may ikakatwiran ka pa ba? lahat ng mga baluktot mong paniniwala at pananampalataya naituwid na ano pa't hirap mo pa ring maniwala halina at pagdoktrina ka na sa Iglesia ni Cristo para mas lalo ka pang maliwanagan ng tunay na aral na mula sa biblia

    ReplyDelete
  64. Those people who believed in Jesus is God have an allergy or phobia in questions answerable by YES or NO.

    Kasi diyan sila madalas naiipit eh.

    Kaya ayaw na ayaw nila ang ganiyang klase ng mga tanong.


    Example:

    Do you believe in Jesus Christ? Of course they will answer YES!

    Do you believe when Jesus Christ said the Father is the only True God in John 17:3? YES or NO!

    Is the Father of Jesus Christ your Father and your God like what he said in John 20:17? YES or NO!

    Do you accept that Jesus Christ is the Man sitting in the right hand of God as mentioned in Psalms 80:17? YES or NO!


    Sasagot ba sila?

    They will not answer that, magpapaikot-ikot sila riyan. Dahil takot na takot sila sa mga tanong na kagaya niyan. Kasi pag sumagot sila ng YES, it would appear that they are contradicting themselves, pag sumagot naman sila ng NO, lalong mas malaking problema kasi, they will contradict the Bible.

    Kaya, I understand ACTS OF LAGUNA, in his phobia in questions answerable by YES or NO.

    What the Bible said about those people who are in the side of the truth:

    1 Peter 3:15 “Honor Christ and let him be the Lord of your life. Always be ready to give an answer when someone asks you about your hope.”[CEV]

    They are always ready to give an answer, and not afraid to answer. Hahahaha.

    Kaya takot siya sumagot, very simple, he is not at the side of the TRUTH.

    ReplyDelete
  65. Jessica..

    Who is the Father of baby Jesus (Messiah)?
    2John 1:3 Grace be with you, mercy, and peace, from GOD THE FATHER, and from the Lord Jesus Christ, THE SON OF THE FATHER, in truth and love.

    When did Jesus become a Son?.. In Bethlehem.
    Luke 1:35 “… that HOLY THING which shall be BORN of thee shall be called THE SON OF GOD.”

    Was there a Son Jesus in heaven prior the Birth in Bethlehem? No.
    The Word (Logos) in John Chapter one is God’s power and wisdom. The Logos is God’s reasoning, thought, ability to decide and create. It was not born nor created; it is in the nature of God, the very essence of the Godhead.

    As the Bible said concerning creation:
    Jeremiah 51:15 He hath made the earth BY HIS POWER, he hath established the world BY HIS WISDOM, and hath stretched out the heaven BY HIS UNDERSTANDING.

    1Corinthians 1:24 But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, CHRIST THE POWER OF GOD, AND THE WISDOM OF GOD.

    God created the heavens and earth by His word:
    Genesis 1:3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

    Colossians 1:16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: [referring to Jesus]

    When the Word manifest in the flesh, does God become two? Does God create another God? Does God left heaven and moved down to earth? No, not at all because God is omnipresent and infinite.

    The Bible also said:
    Matthew 1:18 “… she was found with CHILD OF THE HOLY GHOST.”
    Matthew 1:20 “…for that which is conceived in her IS OF THE HOLY GHOST.”

    Who is now the Father, God or the Holy Ghost? Or they are the same Spirit?

    How about Christ? The Bible said:
    1Peter 1:10 Of which salvation THE PROPHETS have enquired and searched diligently, WHO PROPHESIED OF THE GRACE THAT SHOULD COME unto you: v11 Searching what, or what manner of time THE SPIRIT OF CHRIST WHICH WAS IN THEM did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.

    The Spirit of Christ, the Holy Ghost and God is One:
    Romans 8:9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that THE SPIRIT OF GOD DWELL IN YOU. Now if any man have not the SPIRIT OF CHRIST, he is none of his.
    >> There is only one Spirit of God!

    That’s why we are baptized in Jesus Name because that Name reveals who is the Father, Son and Holy Ghost:

    Matthew 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the NAME of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

    1Corinthians 12:13 "For BY ONE SPIRIT are we ALL BAPTIZED INTO ONE BODY…”

    There is only one Name under heaven given among men whereby we must be saved.

    We must acknowledge that the Messiah was crucified for us, necessary for our salvation. We must also acknowledge God the Eternal Spirit that makes this possible; this is what the Apostles do in many of their writings…

    Regards.....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ok, CHRIST IS THE POWER OF GOD, and WISDOM OF GOD.

      You said JESUS CHRIST is the ALMIGHTY GOD, right?

      So who is that GOD who have Jesus as his power and his wisdom?

      Is that not an ALMIGHTY GOD?

      Can you explain to me in full detail the true meaning of this passage?


      1 Timothy 2:5 "For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;"

      Who is the ONE GOD mentioned there, was it Jesus or the Father?

      If your answer is JESUS, then who is his mediator between him and men?

      Please answer.

      Delete
    2. Jessica, your concern.

      You said:
      "If your answer is JESUS, then who is his mediator between him and men?"

      Your verse:
      1Timothy 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

      If the Bible is only one page, there is no need to discuss, right? As clear as it gets, the MAN Christ Jesus. Then no need for Jesus to say these words:

      John 16:25 These things have I spoken unto you in proverbs: but the time cometh, when I shall no more speak unto you in proverbs, but I shall shew you plainly of the Father.

      Now, what is a Mediator? From the root word "Medium", the one that draw men to God. Due to what? SIN! the one that separate men from God. Mediator is like a Bridge if you may..

      But Jesus is also the Testator…
      Hebrews 9:16 For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the TESTATOR.

      What is Testator? a person who leaves a will or testament in force at his death [Webster]. The Testator is the One that makes the testament or Covenant. Now, Who makes the New Covenant?

      Hebrews 8:8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, SAITH THE LORD, WHEN I WILL MAKE A NEW COVENANT with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:
      >> Who is that Lord?....God Himself! [Jeremiah 31:31].

      It will be quite impossible if a Man act both Mediator and Testator at the same time. Only God can make this possible. As the Bible said:

      Mark 10:26 And they were astonished out of measure, saying among themselves, WHO THEN CAN BE SAVED? V27 And Jesus looking upon them saith, With men it is impossible, but not with God: for WITH GOD all things are possible.

      I will limit my answer based on your query [except otherwise]... I know you have a lot of follow-up questions...

      Regards....

      Delete
    3. Peter of Las Pinas19 March 2012 at 21:56

      See how this fellow wasted a very very Good question of Jessica.

      Instead of answering her straight he come up with another formulated answer. To prove his Catholic invented doctrine true.

      He said:

      ”If the Bible is only one page, there is no need to discuss, right? As clear as it gets, the MAN Christ Jesus. Then no need for Jesus to say these words:

      John 16:25 “These things have I spoken unto you in proverbs: but the time cometh, when I shall no more speak unto you in proverbs, but I shall shew you plainly of the Father.”


      He is not contended with the truth revealed by 1 Timothy 2:5, that there is only one God, and there is only one mediator to God and men, THE MAN CHRIST JESUS.

      He said “if the Bible is only one page, there is no need to discuss.” So it means because the Bible have a lot of pages so to him that makes 1 Timothy 2:5 not credible to be accepted right away. So for him Apostle Paul’s words is not enough. It is not acceptable instantly that there is one God and there is one mediator to God and men. The MAN CHRIST JESUS. Because it is clearly mentioned there that Jesus is a MAN, that’s why it should not be understood as it is. Because to him it is a proverb.

      That’s why he quoted John 16:25 which says:

      John 16:25 “These things have I spoken unto you in proverbs: the hour cometh, when I shall no more speak unto you in proverbs, but shall tell you plainly of the Father.” [RV]

      I don’t really see the relevance of this verse to 1 Tim 2:5 after all the speaker there is not Jesus so it is absolutely not a proverb.

      Jesus in the beginning used proverbs or hard to understand words when he speak about the Father to his disciples, but he promise that there will come a time that he will no longer speak to them in proverbs and will tell them plainly or clearly about the Father.

      When did that happen? When did it started that Jesus talk to them using plain words without using proverbs? Just several verses below it.

      John 16:28-29 I came out from the Father, and am come into the world: again, I leave the world, and go unto the Father. His disciples say, Lo, NOW SPEAKEST THOU PLAINLY, AND SPEAKEST NO PROVERB.

      This is the beginning where Jesus started to talk to them plainly. Then he revealed to them who is the Father in the following chapter.

      John 17:3 “And eternal life means to know you, THE ONLY TRUE GOD, and to know Jesus Christ, whom you sent.”[GNB]

      See? This is how you should understand this, when Jesus said that the FATHER IS THE ONLY TRUE GOD, he is no longer talking in proverbs, in parables, or hard to understand words. He started to reveal them who is the Father is.

      John 17:25-26 “Righteous Father! The world does not know you, but I know you, and these [his disciples] know that you sent me. I MADE YOU KNOWN TO THEM, and I will continue to do so, in order that the love you have for me may be in them, and so that I also may be in them." [GW]

      That’s why by this time and very moment, Jesus already taught them directly who is the TRUE GOD, and that is his FATHER.

      1 Timothy 2:5, is not a proverb, but a direct statement from Apostle Paul. Jesus already said clearly to the Apostles that his Father, is our Father, and his God, is our God [John 20:17] that’s why the statement of Apostle Paul, should be understood as it is.

      There is only one God [the Father], and there is one mediator to God and men, the MAN CHRIST JESUS.

      There is no hidden meaning in that passage. We should understood as it is.

      Again ACTS OF LAGUNA is being mislead by his FALSE UNDERSTANDING.

      Nilalabo ng taong ito ang napakalinaw nang kahulugan nung verse. He is the one making a proverb the already plain sentence of Apostle Paul, which was already made clear by Jesus himself.

      Delete
    4. Peter of Las Pinas19 March 2012 at 22:27

      Tapos may pahabol pa siyang conclusion, to defend his faith that Jesus is God, to contradict 1 Timothy 2:5 of course:

      “It will be quite impossible if a Man act both Mediator and Testator at the same time. Only God can make this possible”.

      Not if the MAN is exalted by God and gave him powers, what else he cannot do.

      Act 5:30-31 “The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom you murdered by hanging upon a cross. HIM GOD HAS EXALTED TO HIS RIGHT HAND AS PRINCE AND SAVIOR, to give repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins.

      Nothing is impossible of course if God granted him such power to accomplish his Mediatorship. But still he remains a HUMAN, and not God. AS A MAN SITTING IN THE RIGHT HAND OF GOD, and NOT AS GOD HIMSELF.

      God made him a SAVIOR, so the ONE SAVIOR the FATHER will save us through Jesus Christ.

      Jude 1:25 “TO THE ONLY GOD OUR SAVIOR, THROUGH JESUS CHRIST OUR LORD, be glory, majesty, might, and authority, from all ages past, and now, and forever and ever! Amen.”

      The only one SAVIOR the FATHER made Jesus Christ a SAVIOR, and trough him we will be saved.

      So it is not really Jesus Christ that will save us, it is his Father the ONLY TRUE GOD.

      For Jesus cannot do anything without the aid of the Father.

      John 5:30 “I CAN'T DO ANYTHING ON MY OWN. As I listen to the Father, I make my judgments. My judgments are right because I don't try to do what I want but what the one who sent me wants.” [GWT]

      This is where ACTS OF LAGUNA, day dreamed. For his explanation is really bizarre and weird.

      And directly defy the very TRUTH written in the Bible.

      Delete
    5. Peter... do not allow yourself to be covered with anger, this is just a discussion. Read it with much desire of truth and love for the Word of God.

      I do not refute her understanding of 1Timothy 2:5, I just showed her the other side of the coin... Jesus being the Testator. And as I have said, I believe she had many more follow-up questions.

      Jesus truly is a man in every aspect of humanity [except sin]. His flesh is same as ours that needs oxygen, food, rest and grows old. But it doesn’t stop there..

      The Bible said:
      2Corinthians 5:19 To wit, that God was in Christ, RECONCILING THE WORLD UNTO HIMSELF, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.

      The Bible also said:
      Colossians 2:9 For in him [referring to Jesus] dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead BODILY.
      Godhead – means all the attributes of God.
      Fullness – means nothing can be added, full, complete.
      All – means nothing missing.
      Bodily – means tabernacled in flesh, in a physical body.

      Peter, I understand your point. But same thing goes, it is not a sin to disclose what the Bible says about Jesus.

      You said:
      "For Jesus cannot do anything without the aid of the Father."
      > In His humanity, Yes. But on the other side of the coin, No, not exactly.

      As the Bible said:
      John 1:3 All things were made by him; AND WITHOUT HIM was not any thing made that was made.

      Regards....

      Delete
    6. Jessica, for your other query...

      You asked:
      "Ok, CHRIST IS THE POWER OF GOD, and WISDOM OF GOD.
      You said JESUS CHRIST is the ALMIGHTY GOD, right?
      So who is that GOD who have Jesus as his power and his wisdom? Is that not an ALMIGHTY GOD?
      Can you explain to me in full detail the true meaning of this passage?"

      Jessica, they are ONE... as the bible said:
      John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and THE WORD WAS GOD.

      In John 10:30-33 when Jesus said, "I and my Father are one." the Jews pick up stones to stone him (verse 31). Why? Because they understood His message as claiming to be God.

      Regards....

      Delete
  66. Peter...

    There is only one Saviour:
    Titus 2:13 Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and OUR SAVIOUR JESUS CHRIST;

    … that will present people… as a Church…
    Jude 1:24 Now unto him that is able to keep you from falling, and TO PRESENT YOU FAULTLESS BEFORE THE PRESENCE OF HIS GLORY with exceeding joy, v25 TO THE ONLY WISE GOD OUR SAVIOUR, be glory and majesty, dominion and power, both now and ever. Amen.

    … to HIMSELF…
    Ephesians 5:25 “… Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; v26 That he might sanctify and cleanse it … v27 THAT HE MIGHT PRESENT IT TO HIMSELF a glorious church…”

    … to claim him SON… and received the Water of Life…
    Revelation 21:6 And he said unto me, It is done. I AM ALPHA AND OMEGA, the beginning and the end. I WILL GIVE unto him that is athirst of the fountain of THE WATER OF LIFE freely. v7 He that overcometh shall inherit all things; AND I WILL BE HIS GOD, AND HE SHALL BE MY SON.

    … unto Everlasting Life…
    John 4:14 But whosoever drinketh of the water that I SHALL GIVE HIM shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him A WELL OF WATER springing up INTO EVERLASTING LIFE.

    … and His NAME is JESUS..
    1John 5:20 And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son JESUS CHRIST. THIS IS THE TRUE GOD, AND ETERNAL LIFE.

    … The True God that gives LIFE…

    ReplyDelete
  67. to ACTS OF LAGUNA,

    do u really have a phobia in questions answerable by YES os NO?

    if no, please answer the questions posted by bro. aerial...


    1. Do you believe in Jesus Christ?

    2. Do you believe when Jesus Christ said the Father is the only True God in John 17:3? YES OR NO!

    3. Is the Father of Jesus Christ your Father and your God like what he said in John 20:17? YES or NO!

    4. Do you accept that Jesus Christ is the Man sitting in the right hand of God as mentioned in Psalms 80:17? YES or NO!

    tnXxX...

    -brainsalad-

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous, [much better if you have an alias]

      My response:
      1. Yes.
      2. Yes.
      3. Yes.
      4. Yes [replacing Psalms 80:17 with Acts 7:55 or Colossians 3:1]

      Now, do you want to know why? Or you want to conclude on your own?

      Well,I really do like your question more than some who asked somewhat like.. "What is your name? answer me, yes or no?"

      Regards....

      Delete
  68. @Acts of Laguna,

    Let’s be honest, on those verses you have given, can we read in them or do they say “JESUS IS GOD”, or “JESUS is a TRUE GOD” or “ALMIGHTY GOD”? They don’t say that, do they?

    There were no passage in the Bible, where you can read WORD FOR WORD that JESUS IS GOD, all lies only in the interpretation of the verses perpetrators of this belief used.

    When it comes to knowing truth about God, Did He not reveal to us that clearly?

    Romans 1:19-20 because THE THING WHICH MAY BE KNOWN OF GOD IS CLEARLY REVEALED WITHIN THEM, FOR GOD REVEALED IT TO THEM. For the unseen things of Him from the creation of the world ARE CLEARLY SEEN, being realized by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, for them to be without excuse. [Modern King James Version]

    God evidently revealed everything about him, his eternal power and Godhead so that people will not have an excuse for not knowing the truth about him.

    So there is no problem for not knowing the True God, because he revealed it to us very clearly, and not as others thought of it as a mystery, and requires a special kind of deciphering skills similar to breaking a hidden code to come up with an answer.

    So everything about God, Who he is? What he is? Is not a mystery, and that was revealed upon realizing those things that He made, and one of them is the BIBLE.

    What the Bible says about the TRUE GOD if someone asks who he is?

    Jesus Christ said:

    Matthew 11:27 "My Father has turned everything over to me. Only the Father knows the Son. And NO ONE KNOWS THE FATHER EXCEPT THE SON AND THOSE TO WHOM THE SON IS WILLING TO REVEAL HIM. [GWT]

    And of course Jesus Christ willingly revealed the Father to us:

    John 17:1,3 “After Jesus finished saying this, he looked up to heaven and said, "FATHER, the hour has come. Give glory to your Son, so that the Son may give glory to you…AND ETERNAL LIFE MEANS TO KNOW YOU, THE ONLY TRUE GOD, and TO KNOW JESUS CHRIST, WHOM YOU SENT.” [GNB]

    Actually when you come to think of it, this statement of Jesus should already be more than enough, because this is very very clear. This is a direct statement from Jesus, telling us that we should acknowledge the FATHER as the ONLY TRUE GOD, and this is a main factor for us to attain Eternal Life.

    He did not say “ETERNAL LIFE MEANS TO KNOW ME AS THE ONLY TRUE GOD”, but he said: “TO KNOW YOU” which refers to the FATHER in heavean.

    See Part 2>

    ReplyDelete
  69. There are two significant truth here that we need to accept and acknowledge:

    1. To know the FATHER as the ONLY TRUE GOD.

    2. To know JESUS CHRIST that the FATHER had sent.


    Because that should be our belief about Jesus, not as another God, but as the one sent by the Father, as a messenger:

    John 17:21 “I pray that they may all be one. Father! May they be in us, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they be one, SO THAT THE WORLD WILL BELIEVE THAT YOU SENT ME.” [GNB]

    John 8:42 “Jesus said to them, "If God really were your Father, you would love me, because I came from God and now I am here. I DID NOT COME ON MY OWN AUTHORITY, BUT HE SENT ME.” [GNB]

    Jesus is very clear with these, we should recognize the FATHER as the ONLY TRUE GOD, and we should recognize JESUS CHRIST as the one sent by the FATHER, as a MESSENGER of GOD.

    That’s why as Romans 1:19-20 said, there were no excuse for us not to know these things, since the Bible already revealed these things to us through Jesus Christ.

    It was already clear that the FATHER is THE ONLY TRUE GOD, that’s why you cannot find other verses in the Bible that will say JESUS as the ONLY TRUE GOD for that will contradict Jesus’ own statement.

    The people who believed in the JESUS IS GOD DOCTRINE, only rely in their own interpretation, and sometimes from MISTRANSLATED PASSAGES, because the Bible really do not have a doctrine about Jesus being God, all lies in SPECULATIONS and ASSUMPTIONS.

    Revelations 1:8 which speaks of the ALMIGHTY GOD as the ALPHA and OMEGA is not JESUS CHRIST. I will post a complete explanation for this topic in a separate thread.

    Watch out for it…

    ReplyDelete
  70. Aerial, I've missed our discussions.. I know you're busy... too many blogs and other things... glad that you're here [thread].

    Truly God reveals the truth, as you quote:
    Romans 1:19-20 "because the thing which may be known of God is clearly revealed within them, for GOD revealed it to them..."

    Matthew 11:27 "My Father has turned everything over to me. Only the Father knows the Son. And no one knows the father except the son and those to whom THE SON is willing to REVEAL HIM. [GWT]

    > Romans 1:19 supports Matthew 11:27… the Son truly is God that reveals..

    Jesus also clearly states:
    John 13:13 Ye call me Master and Lord: and ye say well; FOR SO I AM.

    Who is that Lord?
    Revelation 1:8 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.
    > That is Jesus...

    As Saul inquire in heaven saying:
    Acts 9:5 And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I AM JESUS…”

    Honestly I'm still waiting or the Big surprise promised by Peter. As of now as I recount his defenses, none of them gave me a conclusive, remarkable comments. Just to name a few..

    His Thomas case defense is plain in the ground that he said Thomas was extremely surprised yet able think that he [Thomas] address Jesus as Lord, and as God, the Father in heaven... Cannot connect.

    His Revelation 22:16 case defense that totally attempt to cancel the mere message of the Lord Jesus... "Descendant" replacing "the Root and Offspring".

    And his case defense for "Alpha and Omega" as he suppose "same title does not mean same state of being". Of course far more different from your standpoint. [please correct me if I'm wrong]

    This time I believe you will strengthen their ground... or maybe Peter is not serious yet. For Jessica, Christian and others, I understand them.

    Hope you make this discussions with much maturity coupled with love and respect.

    Regards...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I am preparing a thread for Revelations 1:8,

      You gonna have to wait for it.

      God bless to you and to all my brethrens.

      Delete
    2. Thanks, God bless....

      Delete
  71. tawa much ako kay ACTS OF LAGUNA, hehehe, sabi nya kasi;

    ""God change the name of Lucifer (God-given name) to Satan, which means “Adversary of God”""

    then...

    ""without harming the Word of God, I will replace "Lucifer" with "Satan" and "Devil""

    ABA! sa tingin nya, DIOS PALA SIYA!!!

    weird...

    -brainsalad-

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This reflects how you read your Bible...

      Delete
  72. Peter of Las Pinas20 March 2012 at 15:06

    Doctrines Invented by Mr. ACTS OF LAGUNA,

    1. Thomas prayed and kneeled to Jesus Christ when the time he said “MY LORD and MY GOD”.

    ”By the way, the way we see it... he was in a repented situation, kneeling before Christ.”

    And Jessica, what is the meaning of "prayer" to you.

    2. During that time also Jesus and Apostle Thomas communicate each other with their EYES.

    "AND Thomas answered..." they're already communicating”

    “Lovers can communicate with their eyes, right? That's a form of deep communication.”

    3. God changed the name LUCIFER into SATAN.

    “God change the name of Lucifer (God-given name) to Satan, which means “Adversary of God”

    4. The name given by God to the Son of Isaiah denotes his nature, Because he said:

    Yes.. But when God himself gives the Name.. it is!!..


    WHERE WE CAN FIND ALL OF THESE THAT HE SAID FROM THE BIBLE?

    Apostle Paul said:

    1 Cor 4:6 “Brothers and sisters, I have applied this to Apollos and myself for your sake. YOU SHOULD LEARN FROM US NOT TO GO BEYOND WHAT IS WRITTEN IN SCRIPTURE. Then you won't arrogantly place one of us in opposition to the other.” [GWT]

    Sorry to disappoint you Apostle Paul, but ACTS OF LAGUNA here is directly disobeying what you said which is of course a commandment from the Lord Jesus Christ.

    1 Cor 14:37 Whoever thinks that he speaks for God or that he is spiritually gifted must acknowledge that WHAT I WRITE TO YOU IS WHAT THE LORD COMMANDS.”[GWT]

    And if it’s a commandment from our Lord Jesus Christ so it is a commandment from God.

    John 12:50 “And I know that whatever he says to do will bring eternal life. SO THE THINGS I SAY ARE EXACTLY WHAT THE FATHER TOLD ME TO SAY." [ERV]

    So all those he said up there, is not in the Bible, so it is called UNSCIPTURAL so it is just an INVENTION that we should condemn, it is not a doctrine from God, but a doctrine from MAN, of course from none other than Mr. ACTS OF LAGUNA.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Peter… what’s this???....

      Anyways…

      For Concern #1:
      As I said: “the way we see it”, very very clear that I did not claim it written in the Bible, but MY expression of the picture which I envision as I read those passages.

      As Jessica said:
      Jessica Cruz Mar 15, 2012 06:19 AM
      “I don't know if an EXCLAMATION POINT would not mean He's surprise.
      John 20:28 Thomas answered him, "My Lord and my God!"
      That is exactly what is written in the Good News Bible.
      There is an EXCLAMATION POINT.”

      I do not respond because I respect her as she points out that she gets that from GNB. But since you make an issue out of this, well my friend, Greek has NO exclamation point. I know you know that.

      I believe that when you said “Thomas out of his extreme surprise, he shouted “MY LORD AND MY GOD”!”,.. you are also envision it that way, thou it is not written in the Bible. I don’t need to say that you’re GOING BEYOND WHAT IS WRITTEN because I do understand you.

      For Concern #2:
      Don’t be like Mr Anonymous, I don’t want to think of you that way. Don’t destroy your reputation.

      You’ve captured this from our conversation:
      Jessica Cruz Mar 14, 2012 12:14 AM
      “And you also said:
      "AND Thomas answered..." they're already communicating."
      If they're already communicating, I'm asking you what Thomas said to Jesus PRIOR to the time when he said MY LORD and MY GOD?”

      Now Peter, does this not a form of communication to you?
      John 20:27 “Then saith he to Thomas…”
      John 20:28 “And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.”
      John 20:29 “Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast BELIEVED..”

      Now, since she pointed out the term “PRIOR”, [which I also understand clearly what she meant], that’s why I gave EXAMPLES to make it clear. But since you cut and paste it, it become distorted.

      I even said “JUST EXPOUNDING” [ACTS of Laguna Mar 14, 2012 05:00 PM] to separate topic from examples.

      For Concern #3:
      If you think that the Bible ADD another name for Lucifer, so be it.

      For Concern #4:
      You know well that we are discussing here is about Isaiah 9:6..

      From my comment:
      ACTS of Laguna Feb 16, 2012 01:53 AM
      "Kaya nga hindi komo ganun na ang kahulugan ng isang PANGALAN ang ibig sabihin noon ay iyon na rin ang kalagayan nung tinatawag sa PANGALANG iyon."

      Yes.. But when God himself gives the Name.. it is!!.. Remember Abram and Jacob....
      The Name Jesus, as given to the Messiah, was not an ordinary naming of a child given by parents... it came from God.... :)

      You are now focusing on small details, and that’s good. But don’t make me think that you are struggling…

      I've discussed a lot about my stand, maybe you should pick one and disprove it, the way you do best..

      Regards....

      Delete
    2. Peter of Las Pinas21 March 2012 at 10:15

      To the pitiful ACTS OF LAGUNA:

      As a response to you:

      “For Concern #1:
      As I said: “the way we see it”, very very clear that I did not claim it written in the Bible, but MY expression of the picture which I envision as I read those passages.”


      Well at least you admit that is not from the Bible, so it is clear now that you are saying UNBIBLICAL things, and it is just a product of your ASSUMPTIONS and SPECULATIONS. Not in the Bible, so it is just your OPINION, and INC members do not accept opinion based statements, I already had enough of those kinds of stuffs when I was a Catholic.

      “As Jessica said:
      Jessica Cruz Mar 15, 2012 06:19 AM
      “I don't know if an EXCLAMATION POINT would not mean He's surprise.
      John 20:28 Thomas answered him, "My Lord and my God!"
      That is exactly what is written in the Good News Bible.
      There is an EXCLAMATION POINT.”


      Well at least what she said IS IN THE BIBLE, unless you can prove that the Good News Bible is not a Bible, then go ahead.

      Your assumption is the one not written in ANY PUBLISHED BIBLE on earth, so it is a clear product of your WILD IMAGINATION.

      ”For Concern #2:
      Don’t be like Mr Anonymous, I don’t want to think of you that way. Don’t destroy your reputation.

      You’ve captured this from our conversation:
      Jessica Cruz Mar 14, 2012 12:14 AM
      “And you also said:
      "AND Thomas answered..." they're already communicating."
      If they're already communicating, I'm asking you what Thomas said to Jesus PRIOR to the time when he said MY LORD and MY GOD?”


      So because you cannot of course answer the question, because you said “they’re already communicating” and that is of course another product of your imagination, you again assume that they communicate through their eyes, that’s why you said these:

      “Lovers can communicate with their eyes, right? That's a form of deep communication.”

      Number one, they are not lovers, number two, what you said here is not written in the Bible. So it is called UNBIBLICAL, very simple isn’t it.

      ”For Concern #3:
      If you think that the Bible ADD another name for Lucifer, so be it.”


      This topic has become your QUICK SAND my friend that you can’t get out, and as you can see, there is no way around it. Now you are assuming that I’m thinking that the Bible added another name for Lucifer, now your assuming abilities have gone too far, now you’re even making assumptions out of my own statements. How did you know that? Are you a mind reader also? Cool!

      Now this statement of yours have given you a problem that you cannot solve:

      “God change the name of Lucifer (God-given name) to Satan, which means “Adversary of God”

      Where and when that event that you are saying happen? Where is that in the Bible? That’s what you need to show us, not telling me this stupid statement of yours:

      “If you think that the Bible ADD another name for Lucifer, so be it.”

      Whoever changed the name of Lucifer to Satan, we cannot answer that because there is no record of that in the Bible.

      But we have a proof that there is someone who done that, he replaced the name LUCIFER with SATAN, and I’m talking to him right now. The ALMIGHTY GOD ACTS OF LAGUNA, it’s him. Hahahaha

      Delete
    3. Peter of Las Pinas21 March 2012 at 10:21

      As we continue this Lovely discussion

      “For Concern #4:
      You know well that we are discussing here is about Isaiah 9:6..

      From my comment:
      ACTS of Laguna Feb 16, 2012 01:53 AM
      "Kaya nga hindi komo ganun na ang kahulugan ng isang PANGALAN ang ibig sabihin noon ay iyon na rin ang kalagayan nung tinatawag sa PANGALANG iyon."

      Yes.. But when God himself gives the Name.. it is!!.. Remember Abram and Jacob....
      The Name Jesus, as given to the Messiah, was not an ordinary naming of a child given by parents... it came from God.... :)”


      And this is the topic where you got electrocuted big time. Hehehehe, you said very clearly that when God gave the name, the meaning of that name denotes the nature of the person who was given by that name:

      You said very clearly:

      “Yes.. But when God himself gives the Name.. it is!!”

      Did you say, that this statement of yours apply to Isaiah 9:6 only? Never! You even gave examples of other names given by God, like Abraham, Israel, etc.

      And then you have forgotten that there is another name that was given by God and he gave it to Isaiah’s son which is MAHERSHALALHASHBAZ.

      Is this a name given by God? Yes of course!
      Does the meaning of that name denotes Isaiah’s son nature or state of being? That you should prove.

      And because you cannot, you make this statement of yours which says:“Yes.. But when God himself gives the Name.. it is!!”Not TRUE, because not all names given by God in the Bible have a meaning that denote the person’s [who owns the name] nature and state of being.

      And that is a disaster of your argument. Because it is quite clear that YOU TALK FIRST BEFORE YOU THINK.

      Gothca! There is no way out of this down fall of your reasoning.

      Delete
    4. ibig sabhin prang Doktor. usually hindi na sa proper name ang twg sa knya kundi Dok. ganun lng ka simple ang analogy.

      Delete
  73. Peter of Las Pinas20 March 2012 at 15:58

    Acts of LAGUNA’s DECEPTION:

    Look at this brothers and sisters how this fellow is trying to deceive our clean and innocent minds:

    Let’s read his very bad conclusion:

    “Truly God reveals the truth, as you quote:
    Romans 1:19-20 "because the thing which may be known of God is clearly revealed within them, for GOD revealed it to them..."

    Matthew 11:27 "My Father has turned everything over to me. Only the Father knows the Son. And no one knows the father except the son and those to whom THE SON is willing to REVEAL HIM. [GWT]

    > Romans 1:19 supports Matthew 11:27… the Son truly is God that reveals..


    These fellow is a master of HUMAN LOGIC:


    Look at this:

    “for GOD revealed it to them”

    “THE SON is willing to REVEAL HIM”.

    Therefore: “THE SON TRULY IS GOD THAT REVEALS”.


    You see human wisdom is a foolishness in front of God:

    1 Cor 3:19 “FOR THE WISDOM OF THIS WORLD IS FOOLISHNESS WITH GOD; for it is written, "He takes the wise in their own craftiness." [MKJV]

    And because of this HUMAN WISDOM that humans used they were not able to know God:

    1 Cor 1:21 “THE WORLD WITH ITS WISDOM WAS UNABLE TO RECOGNIZE GOD IN TERMS OF HIS OWN WISDOM. So God decided to use the nonsense of the Good News we speak to save those who believe.” [GWT]

    And they were not able to learn about him by this wisdom:

    1 Cor 1:21 “GOD WAS WISE AND DECIDED NOT TO LET THE PEOPLE OF THIS WORLD USE THEIR WISDOM TO LEARN ABOUT HIM. Instead, God chose to save only those who believe the foolish message we preach.” [CEV]

    That’s why we are very very sure that ACTS OF LAGUNA here, never learned the TRUTH about God. Because he is only using his own wisdom in understanding things about God.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Peter, you've called me a friend of Satan.. is that what you've learn about the truth of God. At the very least Jesus said love your enemy, thou I do not treat you as one.

      Above is my "opening invitation" for Aerial to stir him up answering this thread. And I know it’s not wise to use such, but I dare because there is truth behind that. Thou I failed to convince him, I believe he is preparing for something better... so I'll wait.

      What is wisdom to you anyway?.. Do you think that by just sitting around you will get wisdom from God? No, you have to pray for it, read the Bible, seek His truth, share what you've learn and carry out. I do not know everything about God so I welcome Bible study in our house, goes to the church and there I worship God. If God reminded me of all the verses which I've read and heard and able to apply in our discussion, I 'm blessed.

      Regards....

      Delete
    2. Peter of Las Pinas21 March 2012 at 09:23

      I don't treat you as my enemy as a person, because we consider no person as our enemy as the Bible said who is our true enemy:

      Ephesians 6:12 “FOR WE ARE NOT FIGHTING AGAINST HUMAN BEINGS BUT AGAINST THE WICKED SPIRITUAL FORCES in the heavenly world, the rulers, authorities, and cosmic powers of this dark age.”[GNB]

      Our enemy is the FALSE DOCTRINES and BELIEFS. We are against them in very very high degree.

      Even the Apostles said like this:

      Galatians 1:8 “But even if we or an angel from heaven SHOULD PREACH TO YOU A GOSPEL THAT IS DIFFERENT FROM THE ONE WE PREACHED TO YOU, MAY HE BE CONDEMNED TO HELL! We have said it before, and now I say it again: IF ANYONE PREACHES TO YOU A GOSPEL THAT IS DIFFERENT FROM THE ONE YOU ACCEPTED, MAY HE BE CONDEMNED TO HELL! [GNB]

      If a person teaches a different doctrine not similar to the doctrines of the Apostles, the apostles said “MAY HE BE CONDEMNED TO HELL”.

      The apostles are angry to those people who teaches FALSE DOCTRINES. Of course they are not angry with the person, but to what he is preaching.

      So to make it clear, I am furious in your FALSE BELIEFS, and not to you.

      Delete
  74. Peter of Las Pinas20 March 2012 at 16:00

    He used HUMAN LOGIC which to God is just foolishness, and very easy to prove that. Look at this:

    “The RADIO announce the news to them”

    “MICHAEL is willing to announce the news about him”

    Therefore: MICHAEL is Truly the RADIO that announces”

    See how easy to it is to put to the test the human wisdom? It turns out that the Bible was right, it is indeed that the wisdom of this world is just FOOLISHNESS.

    How can we prove that ACTS OF LAGUNA is making a big mistake here?

    When Jesus Christ said: “THE SON is willing to REVEAL HIM”. does that mean that Jesus is the God the reveals in Romans 1:19-20?

    That is a BIG FOOLISHNESS. Come on!

    How does God spoke to the people during the time of Jesus? Does God himself spoke to them directly?

    Hebrews 1:1-2 “In the past God spoke to our ancestors at many different times and in many different ways through the prophets. IN THESE LAST DAYS HE HAS SPOKEN TO US THROUGH HIS SON...” [GWT]

    See? God revealed to us the truth about Him through his Son Jesus Christ. He used Jesus Christ and commanded him to tell to the people who He really are:

    And Jesus really did revealed God:

    John 17:3 “After Jesus finished saying this, he looked up to heaven and said, "FATHER, the hour has come. Give glory to your Son, so that the Son may give glory to you. AND ETERNAL LIFE MEANS TO KNOW YOU, THE ONLY TRUE GOD, and to know JESUS CHRIST, whom you sent.” [GNB]

    The ONLY TRUE GOD is the FATHER, it was revealed by God through Jesus Christ.

    So ACTS OF LAGUNA’s motives are very clear, he is not here to EDUCATE us, but to DECEIVE us.

    By the way I was never angry to you, in fact I pity you, because your lack of knowledge about the truth made you foolish rather than wise…

    That’s a FACT JACK!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Peter...

      You think that our doctrine is foolishness right? You said my explanation is fool, bizarre, weird, mislead, AWESOME DISPLAY of IGNORANCE, HUMILIATION as VITAMINS….. etc.

      The Bible said:
      1 Corinthians 1:21 “God was wise and decided not to let the people of this world use their wisdom to learn about Him. Instead, GOD CHOSE TO SAVE ONLY THOSE WHO BELIEVE THE FOOLISH MESSAGE WE PREACH.” [CEV]

      Yes, it is foolishness to preach Jesus as God because it is easy to recognize Him as a man. As some said:

      John 6:42 And they said, Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? how is it then that he saith, I came down from heaven?

      If you pity me, help me through explanation. I 'am not an enemy here, but our differences, so I like to discuss. Where's the old Peter???

      Delete
    2. Peter of Las Pinas21 March 2012 at 08:52

      Ows are you sure that passage pertains to you?

      To others the teachings of the INC are just FOOLISHNESS although it is the pure WISDOM of GOD written in the Bible, because our faith is based not in Opinion or Speculations of Men which are based only in their own wisdom and understanding:

      1 Cor 2:4 “and my teaching and message were not delivered with skillful words of human wisdom, but with convincing proof of the power of God's Spirit. YOUR FAITH, THEN, DOES NOT REST ON HUMAN WISDOM BUT ON GOD'S POWER.”[GNB]

      And the God’s power mentioned is the GOSPEL or the WORDS of God:

      Romans 1:16 “I have complete confidence in the GOSPEL; IT IS GOD'S POWER to save all who believe, first the Jews and also the Gentiles.”

      And we don't use FORMULATED APPROACH when we say things about God and about the Lord Jesus Christ.

      WE DON'T COMPARE GOD TO A COIN WITH TWO SIDES

      For comparing God to anyone or to anything is not allowed by God himself:

      Isaiah 46:5 “To whom will you compare me and make me equal? To whom will you compare me so that we can be alike?” [GWT]

      The INC never compare God to anything or to anyone.

      And you call that WISDOM? That is not same as the FOOLISHNESS mentioned in 1 Cor 1:21.

      Yours is not just plain FOOLISHNESS but a product of your grave IGNORANCE…

      Delete
    3. Let us make that clear, many people despised the INC because among the Christian religions, we are the only one who believed that JESUS CHRIST is a MAN, and the FATHER is the ONLY TRUE GOD.

      That's why many are angry to the INC and consider our doctrine foolish for not accepting this common belief although majority of people in the world today is united in accepting Jesus as God.

      And since they are the majority, do that mean they are in the TRUE PATH?

      Jesus has this to say:

      Mateo 7:13-14 "Enter through the narrow gate BECAUSE THE GATE AND ROAD THAT LEAD TO DESTRUCTION ARE WIDE. MANY ENTER THROUGH THE WIDE GATE. But the narrow gate and THE ROAD THAT LEAD TO LIFE ARE FULL OF TROUBLE. ONLY A FEW PEOPLE FIND THE NARROW GATE.” (GWT)

      Only few among the many of the people in the world knew the truth and walking in the right path that leads to life and salvation. And many are those that are mislead by false beliefs and walking at the wrong path that will lead them to eternal suffering in hell on Judgment Day.

      The truth that the INC carries is being outnumbered by the false teachings, because many of the people in the world today do not know the truth which is:

      1Tim 2:3-4 “This is good and pleases God our Savior. HE WANTS ALL PEOPLE TO BE SAVED AND TO LEARN THE TRUTH.” (GW)

      And what TRUTH is that?

      1 Tim 2:5 “THERE IS ONE GOD. THERE IS ALSO ONE MEDIATOR BETWEEN GOD AND HUMANS-A HUMAN, CHRIST JESUS.” (GW)

      God wants us to be saved, but in order for that to happen we need to know and accept the TRUTH, that there is one God the Father, and there is one mediator to between God and men, of course the HUMAN or MAN JESUS CHRIST.

      Only a few people knew that truth, and majority of people consider that as FOOLISHNESS.

      But that is the WISDOM OF GOD, that people did not knew, because they created their own by their own wisdom, that’s why they were not able to arrive in the knowledge of the TRUTH.

      God bless everyone.

      Delete
    4. Christian, INC are not despised people, and we do not consider your belief as foolish because there is no foolishness in believing Jesus as a man and the Bible does not said that...[read 1 Corinthians 1:21-24}.

      Peter, since our argument is becoming unproductive and both of us don't gain anything that will uplift our spiritual hunger for truth nor encourage readers to build an atmosphere of good relationship with other beliefs, which I believe can be settled among Christians through constant communication and discussion, I leave this thread with regret...

      I 'll still visit this site, just invite me when you are ready to discuss other topics, who knows, all of us might be eating dinner together discussing things.

      Aerial, thanks for this blog... I've learned a lot...

      God bless to all.....

      Delete
    5. Just visit the Anti INC Blogs which was created by Catholics and Protestants, and you will see and realize what they call the INC's beliefs and what they call the INC as a whole in all sorts of Bad words that other people can't swallow.

      Majority of religions who believed that Jesus is God hated us because of our beliefs about Jesus.

      We knew that, and experienced that most of the time, from our friends, families, coworkers, who happens to be members in other religions, they don't like and hate the INC because of our beliefs.

      One day when I was still studying, two of my classmates, are debating, one Catholic, and one Born Again Christian. When I try to join their discussion, they suddenly became allies when we discus about Jesus, is he God or not?, and now they are both against me, and forgotten that previously they were arguing. And it end up well actually, because both of them walked out, when I started to show to them reasons from the Bible that I read in front of them, which was actually the Bible of the Born Again that I borrowed to him.

      This proved that really the INC is alone in this doctrine, that the FATHER is the only TRUE GOD, and Jesus Christ is a MAN, which was made by God both Lord and Saviour.

      God bless to every one

      Delete
  75. Friend,I've done that long ago when I argue with my friends when I was still attending INC and I feel the same way. It boost me more because I feel persecuted, so I attend the more. I have same vision that time as you looking at Christianity as a whole and INC in minority. But looking at the larger picture, Muslim and Jews believed that Jesus is a man, they proclaim and defend same way. The differences is that they have Name for God aside from other doctrines... aside from atheist and others.

    Most Christians look on Oneness Pentecostal as a cult, because we profess that Jesus is the Power and Wisdom of God manifested in the flesh, the Word, the One God and not as one person in the Trinity.

    They even burn at stake alive one named Michael Servetus for believing that Jesus is God and not "God the Son". [He's recorded because he is prominent, how about the unnamed].

    Friend, I tell you there is no foolishness in believing that Jesus is a man, but that the Word manifest in Flesh which most Jews and Muslims reject.

    Regards.....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, and I bet when you accepted the belief that JESUS IS GOD, you no longer argue with those people who previously argued with you on this issue.

      Because now you are United in them, who believed that JESUS IS GOD, and that’s the bottom line of it.

      On the other hand, INC believes that THE FATHER IS THE ONLY TRUE GOD, Muslims and Jews they don't call God FATHER. And that's what makes us different from them although we have similar beliefs about Jesus being HUMAN.

      Muslims do not accept Jesus as the SON OF GOD, the Jews do not accept Jesus as the MESSIAH.

      The INC accepts Jesus as the Messiah, and the son of God.

      Of all the religions on earth, as I can say. Only one religion believed that THE FATHER IS THE ONLY TRUE GOD, and that is US, and that is the belief of the true members in Christ’s body as proven by the Bible:

      Ephesians 4:4-6 “There is one body and one Spirit, even as you are called in one hope of your calling, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, ONE GOD AND FATHER OF ALL, WHO IS ABOVE ALL AND THROUGH ALL AND IN YOU ALL.” (GW)

      God bless everyone…

      Delete
  76. IS JESUS THE ONE REFERED AS FATHER IN THIS VERSE?
    LET US ANALYSE ISA 9:6
    For a child is born to us, a son is given us; upon his shoulder dominion rests. They name him Wonder-Counselor, God-Hero, Father-Forever, Prince of Peace.

    IT IS A PUBLIC KNOWLWEDGE THAT THE FATHER IS THE GAVER,AND ON THIS VERSE HE GAVE A SON,THE SON IS NOT ANOTHER GOD BUT MAN, THE AUTHORITY THAT IS PLACED BY GOD ON JESUS SHOULDER ARE THE ONE WITH TITLE "Wonder-Counselor, God-Hero, Father-Forever, Prince of Peace"

    JESUS AKNOWLEDGE THAT THIS GOD GIVEN AUTHORITY HAS BEEN GIVEN TO HIM.
    Mt 28:18 And Jesus came to them and said, All authority has been given to me in heaven and on earth.

    BUT JESUS WILL SUBMIT BACK TO GOD THIS AUTHORITY AND SO IN THE END GOD WILL RULE OVER ALL.
    1COR 15:27 For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him.
    28 And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.

    THE FATHER WILL RULE OVER ALL AS THE ONLY GOD, JESUS AKNOLEDGE THIS TRUTH.
    REV 3:12 Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name.

    ReplyDelete
  77. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  78. Maari po bang pakitalakay po din po ang deuteronomy 6:4 ang Yahweh daw ay pangalan ng Ama Anak at Esperito santo iyon ay dahil sa ELOHIM(Gods) at ang the word ECHAD(unity)na ibig sabihin ay Gods United as one

    ReplyDelete
  79. Pinilipit nyo yung Talata sa Isaiah 9:6
    Ibig nyo bang sabihin mali si Isaiah
    Sa John 17:3 Tinawag na Dios si Jesus.

    ReplyDelete
  80. Janet - Proud To Be Iglesia Ni Cristo9 October 2012 at 08:37

    Ka Aerial, paki sagot nga po si kaibigan na roy about sa talatang John 17:3, request q po sana na makagawa ka po ng Bolg n 2.

    ReplyDelete
  81. Medyo tutulan ko ng bahagya si brother tungkol sa paggamit ng theoporic name na ginamit daw sa Isaiah 9:6.

    Sa tingin ko hindi ito Theoporic name kundi ito ay isang description tungkol sa kalagayan niya. ang fulfillment kc ng propehcy ni isaiah ay mangyayari pa lang pagdating ni Kristo sa lupa.
    Meron bng theoporic name na Mighty God at Everlasting Father?
    ito ba ay parehas ng Immanuel na ang ibig sabhin "God with us"?

    ang definition ng theophory ay:

    Theophory refers to the practice of embedding the name of a god or a deity in, usually, a proper name

    -embedding the name of a god!

    Yun po bng "Mighty God" at "Everlasting Father" ay Theophory?

    tingnan po natin yun mga examples at ihambing natin ito sa isaiah 9:6

    Abiah – Yahweh is my father
    Abijah – Yahweh is my father
    Abijam – Yam is my father (Yam is another name for Yah)
    Adaiah – ornament of Yahweh
    Adalia – Yahweh is just
    Adonijah – my lord is Yahweh
    Ahaziah – vision of Yahweh
    Ahiah – brother of Yahweh
    Ahijah – brother of Yahweh
    Amariah – Yahweh says; integrity of Yahweh
    Amaziah – strength of Yahweh
    Ananiah – Protected by Yah
    Athaliah – Yahweh is exalted
    Azariah – Yahweh has helped
    Batyah – Daughter of Yah

    sa tingin niyo ba parehas ba ito ng nakalagay sa Isaiah 9:6?

    hindi porke ito ay pangalan sasahin ninyo na ito at Theophory.

    tandaan po natin na ang Diyos ay may katawagan din sa pangalan at hndi naitn pwd sabhin ito ay Theophory.

    Luke 11:2
    He said to them, “When you pray, say: “‘Father, hallowed be your name, your kingdom come.

    anu po bng name ng Father sa Luke 11:2?
    theophory din po ba ang tawag dyan?

    pwd ba sbhin ang katawagan din ang pangalang Father sa Diyos?
    o ito ay isang kalagayan?
    dahl pangalan ay ay description din ng kalagayan, d po ba?

    so ito ba parehas:

    - baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit

    - And he will be called....Everlasting Father.

    Theophory pa rin ba yn?

    ReplyDelete

Any accusation attacking an individual or an organization without adequate proofs and evidences, will be DELETED, be responsible in what you are saying at all times.

ATTENTION TO THOSE WHO LEAVE COMMENTS IN THIS BLOG:

I think it’s about time to avoid confusion to anyone, that I will no longer allow anybody commenting in this blog posting as ANONYMOUS, regardless of his Religion and Affiliations. Any comments under the name of ANONYMOUS will be DELETED.

Any comments attacking a PERSON [Ad Hominem], instead of defending his Faith with honor and respect will be DELETED. Never accuse a person or an organization that we have no proper proofs or evidences to support our accusations. Hearsays and fabricated stories with a motive of hurting and dishonoring somebody [either an individual or an organization] will no longer be allowed and be tolerated in this Blog.

If anyone feels that what I have imposed is not fair? There is nobody stopping you in making your own Blog and rules that you so desire. I have all the rights to impose any rules for the sake of orderliness of this Blog as it is written in the Scriptures: “Everything must be done in a proper and orderly way.” [1 Cor 14:40, GNB].

My BLOG, My RULES…

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

NET 25 - Iglesia Ni Cristo Network