Saturday, 14 September 2013

Si Jesu Cristo Nga ba Ang Nagsasalita Sa KAWIKAAN 8:22-30?


     ANG mga naniniwalang Diyos si Cristo kaya nakapanghihikayat ng mga tao ay gumagamit din ng mga talata sa Biblia, kaya ang nagiging sapantaha tuloy ng mga nakakapakinig, totoo ang kanilang itinuturo dahil sa Biblia naman aniya binasa.

Sa mga hindi nakapagsusuri na napangingibabawan lang ng kung magkaminsan ay bunga na lang ng kanilang matinding paghanga marahil sa kanilang tagapagturo ay hindi na namamalayan na sila ay natuturuan na ng MALING ARAL.

Upang masuportahan ang kanilang paniniwala na si CRISTONG DIYOS ay mayroon nang PRE-EXISTENCE o UMIIRAL na mula pa nang pasimula, ay ginagamit nila ang nakasulat sa KAWIKAAN 8:22-30:

Basahin po natin ang nasabing talata:

KAWIKAAN 8:22-30  “Inari ako ng Panginoon sa pasimula ng kaniyang lakad, bago pinasimulan ang kaniyang mga gawa ng una.   Ako'y nalagay mula noong araw mula ng walang pasimula, bago nalikha ang lupa.  Ako'y nailabas ng wala pang mga kalaliman; nang wala pang mga bukal na sagana ng tubig. Bago ang mga bundok ay nalagay, bago ang mga burol ay ako'y nailabas:  Samantalang hindi pa niya nililikha ang lupa, ni ang mga parang man, ni ang pasimula man ng alabok ng sanglibutan. Nang kaniyang itatag ang langit nandoon ako: nang siya'y maglagay ng balantok sa balat ng kalaliman: Nang kaniyang pagtibayin ang langit sa itaas: nang maging matibay ang mga bukal ng kalaliman: Nang bigyan niya ang dagat ng kaniyang hangganan, upang huwag salangsangin ng tubig ang kaniyang utos: nang kaniyang iayos ang mga patibayan ng lupa: Nasa siping nga niya ako na gaya ng matalinong manggagawa: at ako ang kaniyang ligaya sa araw-araw, na nagagalak na lagi sa harap niya;”

Pagkatapos basahin ang mga talatang iyan ay sasabihin nila na si CRISTO raw ang nagsasalita diyan. Iyan daw ay sinalita ni JESUS nung siya daw ay nandun pa sa Langit kasama ng AMA. Kaya daw napakaliwanag na si CRISTO ay DIYOS, kasi meron daw bang tao na umiral o nandun na bago pa lalangin ang SANGLIBUTAN o ang DAIGDIG?

Ating maitatanong sa kanila:  May nabasa ba kayong si CRISTO ang nagsasalita riyan?

Kung magiging tapat man lang sana sila sa atin, kitang-kita naman sa talata na walang sinasabi na si CRISTO ang nagsasalita diyan.

Kahit siguro basahin niyo pa ang buong aklat ng MGA KAWIKAAN wala kayong mababasa na si CRISTO iyan.

Pero alin ang maliwanag? Napakaliwanag na ang nagsasalita sa KAWIKAAN 8:22-30 ay ang KARUNUNGAN, itataas lang natin ang basa sa verse 12 sa parehong chapter:

KAWIKAAN 8:12  “Akong KARUNUNGAN ay tumatahan sa kabaitan, at aking nasusumpungan ang kaalaman at gunita.”

Siyempre hindi tututol ang mga naniniwalang  si CRISTO ang nagsasalita diyan, at ang sasabihin nila, TAMA ang KARUNUNGAN nga ang nagsasalita diyan, tapos magtatanong sila ng ganito:  HINDI BA SINASABI SA BIBLIA NA SI CRISTO AY KARUNUNGAN NG DIYOS?

At babasahin nila siyempre ang talatang ito:

1 CORINTO 1:24  “Nguni't sa kanila na mga tinawag, maging mga Judio at mga Griego, si CRISTO ang kapangyarihan ng Dios, at ang KARUNUNGAN NG DIOS.”

Maliwanag na sinasabi sa talatang ito na si CRISTO ay KARUNUNGAN ng DIYOS. At hindi po kami TUTUTOL kailan man sa sinasabing iyan ng BIBLIA, dahil talagang nasa BIBLIA iyan.

Saan po kami tumututol?  Tumututol kami sa kanilang maling PAGKAUNAWA na isipin no komo’t sinasabi na KARUNUNGAN NG DIYOS si CRISTO, ay siya mismo ang KARUNUNGAN ng DIYOS na sinasabi sa BUONG BIBLIA.

Eh pano kaya ito?

1 HARI 4:29  “At binigyan ng Dios si SALOMON ng KARUNUNGAN, at di kawasang katalinuhan at kaluwagan ng puso, gaya ng buhanging nasa tabi ng dagat.”

Hindi naman kayo siguro tututol na ang ibinigay na KARUNUNGAN kay Haring Solomon ay KARUNUNGAN ng DIYOS, kaya maitatanong natin sa kanila, si CRISTO ba ang ibinigay na KARUNUNGAN kay Solomon?

Eto pa ang isa:

LUCAS 2:40  “At lumalaki ang BATA, at lumalakas, at NAPUPUSPOS NG KARUNUNGAN: at sumasa kaniya ang biyaya ng Dios.”

Dito sa talatang ito na sinasabi na ang batang si CRISTO ay NAPUPUSPOS ng KARUNUNGAN, si CRISTO rin ba ang KARUNUNGAN na PUMUPUSPOS sa kaniyang sarili diyan?  Hindi ba lalabas na DALAWA na ngayon ang CRISTO? Isang BATANG CRISTO na pinupuspos ng KARUNUNGANG CRISTO?

Siguro naman sa isang taong PALABASA ng BIBLIA na may MALINAW NA PAGIISIP ay hindi nila maaaring matanggap kailan man na si CRISTO ang KARUNUNGAN na binabanggit sa mga talatang iyan. Dahil kataku-takot na salungatan ang mabubuo, at hindi lamang sa mga talatang iyan kundi sa napakarami pang iba.

Isa lang ang MALIWANAG: HINDI LAHAT NG NABABASANG “KARUNUNGAN” sa BIBLIA ay TUMUTUKOY kay CRISTO.

Nakabasa lang kasi na KARUNUNGAN iyong nagsasalita sa KAWIKAAN 8:22-30 ipinagpalagay na, na si CRISTO mismo iyon.

Bakit namin natitiyak na hindi si CRISTO ang sinasabi sa KAWIKAAN na KARUNUNGAN?

Narito ang pruweba: Pansinin ang pagpapakilala ng aklat ng KAWIKAAN sa KARUNUNGAN:

KAWIKAAN 7:4  “Sabihin mo sa KARUNUNGAN, Ikaw ay aking KAPATID NA BABAE; at tawagin mong iyong kamaganak na babae ang unawa:”

Maliwanag na ang ipinakikilalang KARUNUNGAN sa KAWIKAAN ay tinatawag na KAPATID NA BABAE, samakatuwid ISANG BABAE. Kaya kung ipagpipilitan na si CRISTO ang KARUNUNGANG iyan lalabas ngayon na bago pa bumaba si CRISTO at NAGKATAWANG TAO si CRISTO ay ISANG BABAE, at naging LALAKE lang nung nasa LUPA na. PROBLEMANG NAPAKALAKI! Kung ganito ang kakalabasan, ito ay maituturing na ARAL na LABAG na LABAG sa BIBLIA.

Baka naman magpalusot at sabihing, diyan sa KAWIKAAN 7:4 hindi si CRISTO iyan kasi BABAE iyan eh, pero iyong nasa KAWIKAAN 8:22-30, iyun si CRISTO iyun kasi LALAKE iyun.

Puntahan natin iyan, so sa kanilang paniniwala ang BABAE lang na tinutukoy na KARUNUNGAN ay iyong nasa KAWIKAAN 7:4, pero iyong nasa KAWIKAAN 8:22-30 iyun daw ay LALAKE.  Totoo kaya iyun?

Hindi ninyo mapapansin sa TAGALOG na BIBLIA ito, pero sa ENGLISH BIBLE mapapansin natin ng maliwanag, itataas lang natin ang basa sa KAWIKAAN 8:1-3:

KAWIKAAN 8:1-3  “Hindi ba umiiyak ang karunungan, at inilalabas ng unawa ang kaniyang tinig? Sa taluktok ng mga mataas na dako sa tabi ng daan, sa mga salubungang landas, siya'y tumatayo; Sa tabi ng mga pintuang-bayan sa pasukan ng bayan, sa pasukan sa mga pintuan siya'y humihiyaw ng malakas:”  [Ang Biblia 1905]

PROVERBS 8:1-3  “Doth not wisdom cry? and understanding put forth HER voice? SHE standeth in the top of high places, by the way in the places of the paths.  SHE crieth at the gates, at the entry of the city, at the coming in at the doors.” [King James Version]

Kitang-kita na sa TAGALOG makakalusot sila riyan, pero sa isa sa mga BIBLIANG ENGLISH, sa KING JAMES, maliwanag na BABAE ang GENDER ng KARUNUNGAN na tinutukoy diyan. Pansinin ang paggamit ng mga PRONOUN o PANTUKOY na “SHE” at “HER” na PAMBABAE na hindi mapapansin sa TAGALOG.

Kaya kahit saan sila sumuot diyan hinding-hindi sila makakalusot sa katotohanang HINDI SI CRISTO ang TINUTUKOY na KARUNUNGAN na nagsasalita sa KAWIKAAN 8:22-30, Well maliban na lang siyempre kung ituturo nila na si CRISTO ay BABAE o isang DIYOSA bago NAGKATAWANG-TAO, heheheh.

Ngunit ito pa ang lalong higit na magpapatunay na talagang MALI ang kanilang PAGPAPALAGAY na si CRISTO iyan. Dahil ang PANGINOONG JESUCRISTO mismo ay nagpapatunay na BABAE ang KARUNUNGAN gaya ng mababasa sa:

LUKE 7:35  “But WISDOM is justified of all HER children.” [KJV]

Kaya klaro na klaro mula OLD TESTAMENT hanggang NEW TESTAMENT ipinapakilala na BABAE ang KARUNUNGAN.

Kaya masasabi na natin na hindi mapagdududahan na nahulog sa MALING PAGKAUNAWA ang mga gumagamit ng KAWIKAAN 8:22-30 para patunayan na si CRISTO ang nagsabi ng mga salitang iyon dahil siya mismo iyon.

 Ito ang ating iiwanang mga tanong:

1.       KUNG HINDI SI CRISTO ANG KARUNUNGAN SA KAWIKAAN 8:22-30, SINO YUN?

2.       BAKIT BABAE ANG PAGPAPAKILALA SA KARUNGAN?

3.       ANONG URING KARUNUNGAN NG DIYOS SI CRISTO at ANO ANG PAGKAKAIBA niya SA KARUNUNGANG BINABANGGIT sa AKLAT ng KAWIKAAN?

Hanggang sa muling pagtalakay….


64 comments:

  1. Spirit is feminine in Hebrew and neuter in the Greek

    linguistically, it would be very difficult to personify wisdom as a man in the Hebrew language.

    (Wisdom) is a feminine word in Hebrew, making a woman a more natural choice linguistically for personification.

    Solomon personified this as women because of this. The Two Women: Madam Folly and Dame Wisdom (Proverbs 7-9)

    Your argument wisdom is female. Jesus is male. Seems contradicting to you but bible has no contradiction if you thoroughly study the meaning of its figurative form not its gender form.

    Wisdom is personified as woman. Why?

    Eve was said to be a woman because 'woman' means 'out of man', and Eve came out from Adam, the man.

    God has no gender but God is actually referred as Masculine in form. Since Wisdom came out of God it was referred as woman. Wisdom has no gender but it is personified as feminine form.

    ReplyDelete
  2. So there is no way possible that Jesus is Wisdom in Proverbs 8:22-30. Since in your belief that he is the TRUE GOD, and the TRUE GOD though GENDERLESS is referred to as a MALE. And there is no instance in the Bible he was referred as a WOMAN.

    Since you are insisting that Jesus is God before he incarnated as a human, it would appear then that there was no instance that he will be referred as a WOMAN, since the TRUE GOD is Actually in MASCULINE FORM. And to you he is THE ONLY TRUE GOD, unless you believed otherwise.

    So JESUS will not be the WISDOM at all in those passages, The WISDOM mentioned in Proverbs 8:22-30 will be His Wisdom instead and not Himself, since He is the ONE TRUE GOD where this WISDOM came from.

    The ones who are creating the contradictions are actually those who insist that Jesus is that Wisdom speaking in the Proverbs, they are the ones Creating contradictions to their own JESUS IS GOD belief.

    ReplyDelete
  3. You know very well that the head of the church is Christ and the body of Christ is the church and also this church is in feminine in form but has no gender. We also call the church as His bride. Bride is also feminine in form but has no gender. Do you think just because the church as "the body of Christ" and "His bride" is in feminine form you directly concluded that the actual flesh of Christ is female? Of course not, this is the same way as we treat or define the wisdom. She is in feminine form but not actual female in gender. Jesus is the wisdom of God, yes of course there is a way that the wisdom is Christ Himself just as His body as church.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Of course the Church was personified as a WOMAN in the Bible. But though it is called the BODY OF CHRIST, it is a separate entity from Christ. Christ is now in heaven and His Church is on Earth. Similar to God, that was never personified as a WOMAN, the Church was never personified as a MAN. There was no instance in the Bible that a Genderless being changes its personified Gender. So are you trying to tell me that Jesus was genderless in the Old Testament and he was personified as a WOMAN, and literally became a MAN when he came down to Earth? And to your belief GOD's WISDOM is a Separate entity from God, like Christ's Church?

    ReplyDelete
  5. I do not agree. Church of Christ on earth is NOT a separated entity. This is His body. Head cannot be separated from its body. Otherwise body is dead without head. Christ is in heaven indeed and His church is the realm of heaven on earth. This is what happening every time we have the liturgy of the Eucharist inside catholic church (Catholic Mass) which you cannot find in any other man-made religion like the church of Manalo. The only separation I know is that the church is separate from the state, which INC of Manalo is not because it is registered under the constitution of the state (Philippines). Nowhere in the bible you will find that church on earth is separated from Christ. God revealed in three person. Person is distinct in definition in personification. God is not personified. Wisdom and church is not a person but personified. Jesus is a male person incarnated but his wisdom is personified as a woman just like His church. Wisdom is not also a separated entity because wisdom itself is not an entity.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You said TheLordiswithyou:

      "Jesus is a male person incarnated but his wisdom is personified as a woman just like His church. Wisdom is not also a separated entity because wisdom itself is not an entity."

      As I can see you're agreeing that WISDOM is NOT a SEPARATE ENTITY from the one who owns It or HER, and that's entirely accurate and Biblical.

      But In your Belief JESUS is the WISDOM of God personified as a WOMAN in Proverbs 8:22-30, right? But you said:

      "JESUS IS A MALE PERSON INCARNATED BUT HIS WISDOM IS PERSONIFIED AS A WOMAN JUST LIKE HIS CHURCH"

      May I know who do you believed as the WISDOM of JESUS which is also personified as a WOMAN?

      If JESUS is the WISDOM of God in the Book of Proverbs, who is the WISDOM OF JESUS that you are saying in your statement?

      Delete
    2. Personified is not a person that simple as it is.

      Person is a physical existence.
      Personified is a logical existence.

      Entity by definition is existed by itself. Something that has real existence. The essence or real nature.

      You are asking me who the wisdom is? Is there any distinction between the wisdom of God and the wisdom of Jesus?

      Delete
    3. And your answer to my question is?

      But In your Belief JESUS is the WISDOM of God personified as a WOMAN in Proverbs 8:22-30, right? But you said:

      "JESUS IS A MALE PERSON INCARNATED BUT HIS WISDOM IS PERSONIFIED AS A WOMAN JUST LIKE HIS CHURCH"

      May I know who do you believed as the WISDOM of JESUS which is also personified as a WOMAN?

      If JESUS is the WISDOM of God in the Book of Proverbs, who is the WISDOM OF JESUS that you are saying in your statement?

      Sorry correct me if I'm mistaken, but what's your answer again?

      Delete
    4. Very interesting question indeed, IF JESUS CHRIST IS THE WISDOM OF GOD, then WHO IS THE WISDOM OF JESUS?

      You said:

      "You are asking me who the wisdom is? Is there any distinction between the wisdom of God and the wisdom of Jesus?"

      So are you trying to tell me that the WISDOM mentioned in PROVERBS is also the WISDOM OF JESUS?

      Delete
    5. Is there any distinction between the wisdom of God and the wisdom of Jesus?

      This is an open-ended question. So the answer alone will either be "YES" or "NO".

      Delete
    6. Can you elaborate how the answer is NO and how the answer is YES...if possible. reference the BIBLE?

      Delete
    7. There is no need for elaboration to that question. The question is just simple.

      Delete
    8. So simple that you cannot explain your answer...

      Delete
    9. Catholic Church has Man-made doctrines... 1. PURGATORY.. 2. praying to MARY.. 3 calling MARY "MOTHER OF GOD" . 4. Rosary beads 5. GOOD WORKS playing any role in getting one saved.. The CATHOLIC church is no better than the church of Manalo.. False founders and false doctrines aplenty

      Delete
    10. Just give me at least ONE God made doctrine that handed down by God Himself.

      Delete
    11. I don't quite understand your question. Elaborate please

      Delete
  6. So in you're belief, the CHURCH is the ACTUAL BODY of CHRIST that we can't separate from Him? And where he is the Church is with him? That will be the MEANING of the CHURCH is not a separate entity from Christ, NOT SEPARATE ENTITY MEANS "AS ONE" and does not COUNT as TWO.. It would appear then that there is no CHURCH on EARTH, because Christ is in HEAVEN, therefore as you concluded the HEAD cannot be separated from the BODY. So the CHURCH is in HEAVEN and not on Earth.

    Of course symbolically the CHURCH is CHRIST's BODY, and it's quite clear that by LAW they cannot be separated:

    Ephesians 5:31 “As the scripture says, "FOR THIS REASON A MAN WILL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER AND UNITE WITH HIS WIFE, AND THE TWO WILL BECOME ONE. There is a deep secret truth revealed in this scripture, WHICH I UNDERSTAND AS APPLYING TO CHRIST AND THE CHURCH.” [Good News Bible]

    It is quite clear that though the CHURCH is CHRIST’s BODY, it is also regarded and considered by APOSTLE PAUL as CHRIST’s SPOUSE.

    And I know though HUSBAND and WIFE are considered “AS ONE” or “UNITED” in MARRIAGE, they can never be ONE ENTITY…there will always TWO BEINGS UNITED as ONE, not by NUMBER but by UNITY.

    A HUSBAND can LEAVE his WIFE and go other place, but still by LAW they are “UNITED” and no one can separate them. As the SCRIPTURES says:

    Mark 10:9 Therefore, DON'T LET ANYONE SEPARATE WHAT GOD HAS JOINED TOGETHER." [God’s Words Version]

    The CHRIST and his CHURCH are HISBAND and WIFE according to the BIBLE…so they are a SEPARATE ENTITY joined as ONE.

    By saying that the CHURCH and CHRIST are not SEPARATE ENTITY, you are trying to say that CHRIST is also the CHURCH, and the CHURCH is also CHRIST, similar to saying the HUSBAND is also the WIFE, and WIFE is also the HUSBAND…I believe you will agree that that would be ABSURD…and MOST OF ALL UNBIBLICAL….

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Reason you cant comprehend CHURCH as the CHURCH that's the BODY is NOT a PHYSICAL entity on earth. CHURCH being the body is the ELECT.. That's why there are millions throughout history that are SAVED.. and to be SAVED one must be of the BODY of CHRIST. and these people were NEVER a member of a LOCAL congregation. That's why the BODY is ALWAYS with the HEAD , which is JESUS in heaven

      Delete
  7. Your analogy seems obscure. Your argument of separation of Christ and His Church is such a completely un-biblical. Just because His church is in carnal world that doesnt mean that it is set apart of Spiritual kingdom. Like I said. The realm of Heavenly kingdom is manifested in the earthly church. By the way the church is not referring to the building, it refers to the whole body of believers in Christ.

    Now for the sake of marriage argument. It is clearly stated in the bible that flesh joining flesh is one flesh. (Gen 2:24). The Hebrew word for “one” is "echad" which means “one, alike, altogether, or all at once.” Are married couple to your statement means they are united but still separated entity? NO! God joined them as one flesh. God sees them as one flesh. Even if you mean that they are separated in time and space but they are one flesh. We must keep in mind that time and space are finite concepts; God is not bound by them, nor could God live in one physical place, as we think of it, because the physical universe is his creation and cannot contain him. Heaven is a place, but not a particular space. The truth is, we don't know exactly what heaven is like—even if we did, we could not reduce it to language, which is a human mind incapable of containing God.

    ReplyDelete
  8. You are saying:

    "Are married couple to your statement means they are united but still separated entity? NO! God joined them as one flesh. God sees them as one flesh. Even if you mean that they are separated in time and space but they are one flesh."

    Are you trying to prove based on your UNDERSTANDING that in the eyes of God right now...he do not see MARRIED COUPLES as two INDIVIDUAL BEINGS in TWO PHYSICAL BODIES? So if a HUSBAND committed a SIN the WIFE also will be held accountable, because in the eyes of GOD they are literally ONE and NOT TWO?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Show me Biblical explanation regarding my Question above.

      Delete
    2. I cannot show you biblical explanation on your own question. That is your question not mine. Show it yourself. Not unless if you mean that I must show you biblical explanation to the answer of your question above.

      Delete
    3. Well CATHOLICS do have BIZAARE EXPLANATIONS and BELIEFS to the SYMBOLISM expressed in the Bible. That's why 3 is 1 and 1 is 3...which of course they will escape to the reasoning that it is a MYSTERY...to avoid the TRUTH that they cannot explain it.

      Delete
    4. You know what more bizarre is? You are trying to reach the knowledge of God.

      Delete
    5. You know what more bizarre is? You are trying to reach the knowledge of God.

      Delete
  9. Marriage is bound only in flesh on earth. That is why they are one flesh. Marriage ends at death. All the sacraments ends in heaven. Marriage means procreation. The marriage is only an image of this union, the Image of God.

    The two forms of the Catholic vows of marriage end with: “until death to us part” and “I will love you and honor you all the days of my life.”

    God judge impartially.

    ReplyDelete
  10. As usual, a typical CATHOLIC, they cannot answer from the Bible...Because the Bible is not only the SOLE SOURCE of their beliefs.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Is there any verse stated that bible alone is the only source of faith and practice?

      Delete
    2. TheLordiswithyou said:

      “Is there any verse stated that bible alone is the only source of faith and practice?”


      Well as you have ask, we will answer from the SCRIPTURES:

      1 Corinthians 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.” [God’s Words Version]

      It is clearly sated in the Bible that:

      “YOU SHOULD LEARN FROM US NOT TO GO BEYOND WHAT IS WRITTEN IN SCRIPTURE”

      And what SCRIPTURE Apostle Paul was referring to?

      2 Timothy 3:15-17 “And that from a child thou hast known the HOLY SCRIPTURES, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works. [King James Version]

      If the APOSTLES said that we should not go beyond to what is written in the HOLY SCRIPTURES…They strictly mean that we cannot accept any teachings, practices, and beliefs not written in the pages of the Bible.

      This separates the LAWS OF GOD which are written in the Bible to the LAWS or COMMANDMENTS OF MEN not found in the Bible, that we should not ever obey at all

      As GOD so declared:

      Matthew 15:8-9 “This people honoureth me with their lips: but their heart is far from me. AND IN VAIN DO THEY WORSHIP ME, TEACHING DOCTRINES AND COMMANDMENTS OF MEN.” [Douay Rheims Version]

      Apart from what is written, we should never accept any beliefs, practices, and teachings not written in the Bible most specially if those beliefs will create contrast and contradictions to what is written.

      Delete
    3. I know that your belief is base on the doctrine of the Sola Scriptura.

      The verse you quoted in 1 Corinthians is not sufficient to stand and not promoting Sola Scriptura. You are being misuse of the verse and out of context.

      No verse in the bible stated that scriptures is sufficient and cannot rely on oral tradition.

      Saint Paul is not teaching Sola Scriptura, it would have been conflict to the rest of the apostles. It is the fact that most of the apostles never wrote any single line in the scriptures, they just transmitted the faith orally. Since scriptures was written by hand they were not able to reproduce it on a wide scale to disseminate it prior to the invention of printing press.

      The "what is written" is in reference to the old scriptures. If he is promoting Sola Scriptura doctrine he would only accept authority from the Old Testament writings and beyond all books written were all fallible. Even Old Testament is not sufficient in matters of doctrine. The writing of Saint Paul on the 1 Corinthian is circa 56 AD, for this would mean all New Testament books written after the year 56 would not qualify under the 1 Corinthians 4:6 guideline. You know there's a lot of scriptures circulating in apostolic time, a lot were fakes, for which among these books are inspired and should be valid for reading and who will be their readers for there's a lot of illiterate on their time? Bible is not a bible if is not yet canonized. The canonization of the bible is in fact in 4th century.

      What he has in mind is the divine judgement that is in context of verse 1 to 5. Verse 6 is an allusion to the book of life "what has been written".

      "The already flimsy case for sola scriptura is further weakened by Paul's comments in 1 Corinthians 11:2 where he praises the Christians in Corinth for holding fast to the traditions just as he had handed them on to them. It's clear from the context that he was referring to oral Tradition because the Corinthians had as yet no New Testament Scriptures, 1 Corinthians being the very first letter Paul had sent them. Prior to this letter all his teaching had been oral."

      "The same is true in the case of the Ephesians to whom Paul said, "I did not shrink from proclaiming to you the entire plan of God" (Acts 20:27). This statement debunked sola scriptura. Paul remained in Ephesus for over two years teaching the faith so diligently that "all the inhabitants of the province of Asia heard the word of the Lord" (Acts 19:10), yet his epistle to the Ephesians is a scant four or five pages and could not even begin to touch upon all the doctrines he taught them orally."

      If you do not accept tradition then you must not also accept the bible for the bible itself is Catholic tradition, belief and practices. We are able to canonized the written tradition. We are also able to canonized oral tradition.

      Delete
  11. The Lordiswithyou said:

    ”You know what more bizarre is? You are trying to reach the knowledge of God.”

    In one way you can be right because there are things really that are beyond the reach of our Human minds, as the SCRIPTURES proved it:

    Job 11:6 “He would tell you there are many sides to wisdom; THERE ARE THINGS TOO DEEP FOR HUMAN KNOWLEDGE. God is punishing you less than you deserve.” [Good News Bible]

    And if HUMAN BEINGS are keepin’ on trying to gain what are beyond our reach, that is not just Bizzare it is WRONG.

    But when it comes to GOD’S NATURE and things about him, did he not made things clear for us? Is this KNOWLEDGE part of those things that HUMAN MINDS can’t reach?

    Apostle Paul have the answer:

    Romans 1:19-20 “WHAT CAN BE KNOWN ABOUT GOD IS CLEAR TO THEM BECAUSE HE HAS MADE IT CLEAR TO THEM. From the creation of the world, GOD'S INVISIBLE QUALITIES, HIS ETERNAL POWER AND DIVINE NATURE, HAVE BEEN CLEARLY OBSERVED IN WHAT HE MADE. As a result, PEOPLE HAVE NO EXCUSE.” [God’s Words Version]

    The Bible said that everything about God was made clear by God to us. His INVISIBLE QUALITIES, HIS ETERNAL POWER, and DIVINE NATURE, have been clearly observed in what he made…SO THAT PEOPLE HAVE NO EXCUSE.

    If there some things we can consider as a MYSTERY in God, this is not part of that MYSTERY, because GOD’s teachings about everything about HIMSELF, He made them clear to us…

    So for us this is not a MYSTERY.

    Unlike your belief about God:

    “The Trinity is a wonderful mystery. No one understands it. The most learned theologian, the holiest Pope, the greatest saint, all are mystified by it as the child of seven. It is one of the things which we shall know only when we see God face to face….” [Rev. Martin J. Scott, S.J., GOD AND MYSELF: AN INQUIRY INTO THE TRUE RELIGION, p. 118.]

    Seems that GOD never revealed to you things about Him Clearly.

    ReplyDelete
  12. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  13. "So for us this is not a MYSTERY."

    I disagree...

    Because we human still have finite mind even if you are very saint of saints. THE BIBLE ONLY TEACHES WHAT HUMAN MIND CAN UNDERSTAND. But the true knowledge about nature of God is still beyond our reach, IT IS STILL A MYSTERY FOR US HUMAN. The God who created the universe cannot be bound by its space. How much more for the human mind cannot reach the end of this space. For God "stretched out" the heaven. How do you supposed to understand that?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So you are disagreeing to what the Bible just said:

      Romans 1:19-20 “WHAT CAN BE KNOWN ABOUT GOD IS CLEAR TO THEM BECAUSE HE HAS MADE IT CLEAR TO THEM. From the creation of the world, GOD'S INVISIBLE QUALITIES, HIS ETERNAL POWER AND DIVINE NATURE, HAVE BEEN CLEARLY OBSERVED IN WHAT HE MADE. As a result, PEOPLE HAVE NO EXCUSE.” [God’s Words Version]

      Well you just said yourself the HOLY SCRIPTURES are not enough...I got your point...That's why this statement is not enough...

      Delete
    2. I did not disagree with it instead I fully agree. I said "THE BIBLE ONLY TEACHES WHAT HUMAN MIND CAN UNDERSTAND". That is not sound disagreement to that verse. How if God tell us about heavenly things? About things not of this world? Are we able to understand God? The nature of God is not of this world so there is no way that we can understand it fully. We may understand him through bible but what God want us to know is that there is God and that's Him.

      Delete
    3. SABI NI ginoong aerial" kahit siguro basahin niyo pa ang buong aklat ng mga kawikaan wala kayong mababasa na si cristo iyan.

      kung word for word ang hinahanap mo hindi talaga mababasa na word "cristo" sa kawikaan.

      pro kung gamitin nyo ang inyong pang unawa malalaman nyo kung sino ang tinutukoy sa talata.

      halimbawa:

      kawikaan 30:4- sino ang sumampa sa langit at bumaba?sino ang pumisan ng hangin sa kanyang mga dakot? sinong nagtali ng tubig sa kanyang kasuutan?sinong nagtatag ng lahat ng mga wakas ng lupa?ano ang kanyang pangalan, at ano ang pangalan ng kaniyang anak kung iyong nalalaman?

      kung may analisis power kayo sino ang anak na tinutukoy dito?
      siguro itanong nyo kung may cristo ba akong nabasa sa talata?

      malinaw naman na wala ang word "cristo"

      kaya ang tanong sino ang anak na tinutukoy sa talata?paki sagot ng direct.

      sa proverb 8:22-30 tutol kayo na si cristo ang nagsasalita.
      dapat i post nyo ang direkta ninyong sagot para makita natin kung ano ang palusot nyong sagot.


      hindi ako ng sulong na si cristo ang DIOS AMA DAHIL SA pag depensa sa talata sa pro 8:22-30,

      pro bakit ako naniniwala na si cristo ang nagsasalita sa pro 8:22-30 dahil harmony po ito sa ibang talata.

      "ang panganay ng lahat ng kalalangan"

      "upang makita nila ang kaluwalhatian ko,na ibinigay mo sa akin sapagkat akoy iyong inibig bago natatag ang sanlibutan"

      hindi ako nagtataka bakit tutol kayo sa pro 8: 22-30 dahil sa inyo ang likas na kalagayan ni cristo ay tao palagi.

      Delete
    4. Nakakatuwa ka naman shyllacsjw:

      Kasi sabi mo:

      “SABI NI ginoong aerial" kahit siguro basahin niyo pa ang buong aklat ng mga kawikaan wala kayong mababasa na si cristo iyan.

      kung word for word ang hinahanap mo hindi talaga mababasa na word "cristo" sa kawikaan.”


      Napansin ko na pinapasadahan mo lang ng tingin ang aking ipinost na ito at hindi mo talagang binabasa at inuunawa, kusabagay hindi kasi iyan PUBLIKASYON…ang tinutukoy ko na kahit basahin pa ang buong KAWIKAAN ay walang mababasa na si CRISTO ang tinutukoy na KARUNUNGAN, dahil iyan ang SUBJECT MATTER o PAKSANG PINAG-UUSAPAN sa Post na ito…dahil ang KARUNUNGAN sa KAWIKAAN ay nagtataglay ng FEMININE GENDER o isang BABAE, papaano magiging si CRISTO iyun?

      Hindi ko sinabi na walang mababasang talata na tumutukoy kay CRISTO sa buong AKLAT NG KAWIKAAN…

      Sana naman ay mag-iisip muna po ng konti, bago tayo magbibigay ng interpretasyon sa pananalita ng iba para hindi tayo sumasablay…maliban na lang kung sanay kayong sa pagsablay aba’y ibang usapan na iyon. hehehehe

      Delete
    5. para po matigil na ang debate eto po ang basahin nyo ang buong katotohana.....

      http://www.thename.ph/

      Delete
  14. Yong nagcocoment ng my power analisis ang pananaw mo eh hindi tumpak don sa karunungan spagkat hindi dapat manaig ang karunungan don sa karunungan ng nasusulat sa kawikaan, ngayon sa kawikaan 8:32
    32 "At ngayon, aking anak, ako nga ay pakinggan,
    sundin ang payo ko't liligaya ang iyong buhay. so for that lumalabas na may anak na si cristo noon f sya yong tinutukoy mo ako buhat don 22 hanggang 32 ay iisang

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yong nagcocoment ng my power analisis ang pananaw mo eh hindi tumpak don sa karunungan spagkat hindi dapat manaig ang karunungan mo don sa karunungan ng nasusulat sa kawikaan, ngayon sa kawikaan 8:32
      32 "At ngayon, aking anak, ako nga ay pakinggan,
      sundin ang payo ko't liligaya ang iyong buhay. so for that lumalabas na may anak na si cristo noon f sya yong tinutukoy mo ako buhat don 22 hanggang 32 ay iisang

      Delete
    2. TO: TRUTH

      pansinin mo sa kawikaan 8:31 wag mong putolin anong sabi?

      "at aking kaaliwan ay sa mga anak ng mga tao"

      ang mga tao ay tinawag na mga anak masama ba? yong mga apostol nga sinabi ni jesus mga anak.

      pro hindi ibig sabihin nanganak si cristo buhat ng doon sya sa langit literally.

      katunayan kaibigan truth hindi lamang si cristo nag personipikasyon ng karunungan sa buong kawikaan kundi pati si solomon dependi sa context.

      pls read kawikaan 2:1-5, kawikaan 4:1-27 o kaya sa buong kawikaan. paki meditiate sa talata.

      Delete
  15. Yes. Because Jesus is also called ETERNAL FATHER.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. para po matigil na ang debate eto po ang basahin nyo ang buong katotohana.....

      http://www.thename.ph/

      Delete
  16. personipikasyon ng karunungan.

    ang ulat ng kasulatan tungkol sa salita ay katugma-katugma ng paglalarawan sa [kawikaan 8:22-30]doon ay binibigyang katauhan ang karunungan na para bang itoy nakapagsasalita at nakakakilos[ kawikaan 8:

    totoo sa wikang hebreo na nagtatakda ng kasarian sa mga pangalan[ gaya rin ng maraming iba pang wika] ang salita para sa karunungan ay laging nasa kasariang pambabae.

    hindi nagbabago ang kasarian nito kahit binibigyang katauhan ang karunungan
    at sa gayoy maaari parin itong gamitin sa makasagisag na paraan para upang kumatawan sa panganay na anak ng DIOS.

    HALIMBAWA:

    SA pananalitang" ang DIOS ay pag ibig 1 juan 4:8" ang salitang griego para sa "pag ibig"ay nasa kasariang pambabae rin ngunit hindi ito nangangahulugan na babae ang DIOS. DAHIL ANG DIOS ay walang gender.

    bilang pangunahing manunulat ng mga kawikaan sa kaw 1:1 ikinapit ni solomon sa kaniyang sarili ang titulong"qo-he`leth" [tagapagtipon ] ecc 1:1 na nasa kasarian din ng pambabae.
    at alam naman natin na si solomon ay lalake.

    nakikita lamang ang karunungan kapag ipinahayag ito sa isang paraan.

    ang sariling karunungan ng DIOS ay nahayag sa paglalang ngunit itoy sa pamamagitan ng kanyang anak.

    gayundin naman,ang puspos ng karunungan layunin ng DIOS para sa sangkatauhan ay ipinakikita sa pamamagitan ng kanyang anak si cristo at nabubuod sa kanya.

    dahil dito maaaring sabihin ng apstol na ang kapangyarihn ng DIOS AT KARUNUNGAN NG Dios ay kinakatawanan ni cristo.at na si cristo jesus para sa atin ay naging karunungan mula sa DIOS AT katwiran din at pagpapabanal,pagpapalaya, sa pamamagitan ng pantubos.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. para matigil na ang debate sa mga relihiyon eto ang basahain nyo na bukas ang puso at ang inyong isipan napakaganda po ng paliwanag maliwanag pa sa sikat ng araw.....

      http://www.thename.ph/

      Delete
  17. good day po ginoong aerial !

    ang sabi mo: hindi ko sinabi na walang mababasang talata na tumutukoy kay cristo sa buong AKLAT NG KAWIKAAN...

    ibig mo bang sabihin mayrong talata na tumutukoy kay cristo sa kawikaan? oo or wala?

    kung literal ang pang unawa mo sa karunungan[ isang babae] na nasa kawikaan 8:22-30 accept ka ba na isang babae ang nagsasalita sa kawikaan 8:30-31?

    "nasa siping nga niya ako na gaya ng matalinong manggagawa: at ako ang kanyang ligaya sa araw araw na nagagalak na lagi sa harap niya; na nagagalak sa kanyang tinatahanang lupa"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mukhang napakarami ninyong aral na kamukhang-kamukha ng SIMBAHANG KATOLIKO ah, Sila ang unang nagpaliwanag sa tao na ang KARUNUNGAN sa KAWIKAAN 8:22-30 ay si CRISTO para patunayan na si CRISTO ay umiiral na mula nang pasimula, at sila rin ang NAUNANG NAGTURO na ang PANGALAN ng DIYOS ay JEHOVAH:

      “JEHOVAH – The proper name of God in the Old Testament; hence the Jews called it the name by excellence, the great name, the only name, theglorious and terrible name, the hidden and mysterious name, the name of the substance, the proper name, and most frequently shem hammephorash, i.e. the explicit or the separated name, though the precise meaning of this last expression is a matter of discussion (cf. Buxtorf, "Lexicon", Basle, 1639, col. 2432 sqq.).
      Jehovah occurs more frequently than any other Divine name. The Concordances of Furst ("Vet. Test. Concordantiae", Leipzig, 1840) and Mandelkern ("Vet. Test. Concordantiae", Leipzig, 1896) do not exactly agree as to the number of its occurrences; but in round numbers it is found in the Old Testament 6000 times, either alone or in conjunction with another Divine name. The Septuagint and the Vulgate render the name generally by "Lord" (Kyrios, Dominus), a translation of Adonai — usually substituted for Jehovah in reading.” [“Jehovah” – CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA]

      Kami kasi nang iwan na namin ang pagiging KATOLIKO, iniwanan na rin namin ang KANIYANG MGA ARAL.

      Kayo hindi nga Katoliko, pero ang itinataguyod ninyo ARAL nila, heheheheh

      Delete
    2. to:cristian

      dahil ba hindi nyo kayang sagutin ang mga tanong ko na post ko sa itaas,lumundag kayo sa ibang topic?

      napakalabo nyo naman, sinali nyo pa ang iglesiang katoliko.

      buti pa ngang mga katoliko ang DIOS ama nilay may pangalan.

      noong hindi pa natatag ang iglesiang katoliko ang DIOS may pangalan na.

      yong mga post mo sa itaas alam na namin yan.

      kaya balik tayo sa tema dito.

      paki sagot sa mga tanong ko sa itaas.

      Delete
    3. Eh bakit hindi ninyo inaamin sa mga tao na SIMBAHANG KATOLIKO ang ORIHINAL na nagturo na ang PANGALAN ng DIYOS ay JEHOVAH, kapag sinasabi namin na KTOLIKO unang nagturo niyan sa mga KAPATID mo na nagbabahay-bahay nagagalit sila...

      HINDI NIYO NAMAN TALAGA MAIPAGKAKAIALA NA "KATOLIKO" ang ORIGINAL niyan, kaya sila ang UNANG NAKASAKSI niyan at hindi kayo.

      Delete
    4. tanong ko sana:

      ang simbahang katoliko ba nag tuturo na ang pangalan ng DIOS JEHOVA?

      NARINIG MO BA ITO SA KANILANG MISA?

      PAANO MO MASASABING KAMUKHANG -ka MUKHA ANG TURO NG SAKSI NI JEHOVAH AT KATOLIKO? hindi mo naman narinig o alam ang lahat bawat doktrina nila.

      dahil kung alam mo na ang lahat bawat doctrina nila hindi ka sana mag conclude kamukhang-kamukha ang turo ng saksi ni jehova at katoliko.

      so wag kang mag bitiw ng salita na wala kang alam.

      totoo na may mga katoliko dati na nag susulong na ang pangalan ng DIOS JEHOVA.

      PRO makapagsasabi ka pa ba na katoliko sila na nag sulong sa pangalang jehova kung silay pinatay ng mga leader ng katoliko?

      katoliko parin ba sila kung isinambulat nila ang mga maling turo ng katoliko?

      masasabi mo ba na kotoliko parin sila kung bumitiw na sila bilang katoliko?

      Delete
    5. Alam mo Shylla, kahit na hindi mo narinig sa kanilang MISA, nasa kanilang aklat mababasa mo iyan, hindi lahat ng ARAL KATOLIKO naririnig sa MISA. Tanungin mo KATOLIKO kung alam ang ibig sabihin ng salitang "KATOLIKO" bibihirang KATOLIKO nakakaalam niyan. Pero masasabi mo bang HINDI ARAL KATOLIKO iyan kasi hindi itinuro sa MISA?

      Kaya may nababasa sa AKLAT nila na ANG PANGALAN ng DIYOS ay JEHOVAH ay sapagkat sila ang UNANG NAGTURO niyan. Ang paniniwalang si CIRO ang IBONG MANDARAGIT sila din ang UNA na nagsabi niyan. At si CRISTO ay KARUNUNGAN ng DIYOS sa KAWIKAAN 8:22-30, sila din ang kauna-unahanng nagpaliwanag niyan,

      Karamihan ng BIBLE SCHOLARS ay CATHOLIC at PROTESTANT, ang CATHOLIC ang UNANG NAGTURO na ang PANGALAN ng DIYOS ay JEHOVAH, ang PROTESTANTE galing sa CATHOLIC kaya kinopya nila ang aral na iyon...kaya MAJORITY sa KANILA inilagay sa kanilang BIBLIANG ISINALIN ang PANGALANG JEHOVAH...

      At inaamin iyan ng isang CATHOLIC WEBSITE na ang PANGALANG JEHOVAH ay IMBENTO ng SIMBAHANG KATOLIKO:

      Basahin mo ito:

      “Interestingly, this fact is admitted in much Jehovah's Witness literature, such as their AID TO BIBLE UNDERSTANDING (p. 885). This is surprising because Jehovah's Witnesses loathe the Catholic Church and have done everything in their power to strip their church of traces of Catholicism. DESPITE THIS, THEIR GROUP'S VERY NAME CONTAINS A CATHOLIC "INVENTION," THE NAME "JEHOVAH." [“CATHOLIC ANSWERS”, www.catholic.com – “YAHWEH or JEHOVAH”]

      Uulitin natin ang sinabi baka hindi mo mapansin:

      "THEIR GROUP'S VERY NAME CONTAINS A CATHOLIC "INVENTION," THE NAME "JEHOVAH."

      Kayo sinasabihan ng WEBSITE na iyan na ang PANGALAN ng inyong RELIGION ay nagtataglay ng IMBENTONG PANGALAN ng KATOLIKO - ANG PANGALANG "JEHOVAH".


      Umaamin ang KATOLIKO na INIMBENTO nila PANGALANG "JEHOVAH", kaya sila ang ORIGINAL niyan...kayo ay NANGOPYA lamang sa ARAL nila na dati nang umiral...

      Delete
    6. base sa source nyo na inyong pino post, ang yahweh,jehovah,yehowah, galing ito sa mga katoliko kamo.

      ngayon paano po ninyo isalin sa english at tagalog ang pangalan ng DIOS,

      NAPAKA UNPAIR naman na ang lahat ng mga pangalan na nasa biblia sinalin tapos ang pangalan NG DIOS hindi.

      wala akong paki alam kung aaminin sa iglesiang katoliko kung para sa kanila inbento ang pangalang JEHOVA.

      TINGNAN NATIN KUNG ANO ANG SABI NG KATOLIKONG SIMBAHAN.

      -----ganito inilarawan ng THE STORY OF THE OLD CATHEDRAL--isang buklit na inilathala ng simbahan ang disenyo ng pasukan ng katedral may napakagandang timpano sa ibabaw ng portiko at sa gitna nito makikita ang malaking hebreong letrang kinalupkupan ng ginto na kumakatawan sa pangalan ng DIOS na hindi dapat bigkasin.

      sabi NG Ibat ibang pope ng katoliko hindi pwide bigkasin ang pangalan ng DIOS KUNDI AMA,AT DIOS LAMANG.

      ITO BAY PARIHO SA inyong turo, kayo pala ang nangongopya sa turo ng katoliko.

      ngayon ang katoliko, binabawalang gumamit sa pangalang jehovah dahil ininbinto lamang nila noon.

      paano mo masasabing magkapariha ang turo ng saksi ni jehova? na ngayon hindi naman ito umiral sa doctrina ng katoliko, ang pag gamit ng pangalang jehova. at kahit buhat ng unang itinayo ang iglesiang katoliko wala silang turo na isulong ang pangalang jehovah kahit mag tanong kapa sa kanilang pope.




      Delete
  18. Nakakatawa nman yong nagcomment na maraming aral ang INC , lalo na yong nagcomment na christian halatang hindi nya naunawaan yong comment sapagkat pare parehas kayong naniniwalang dios ang panginoong hesus ginagamit din nila itong talata upang patunayan nilang dios ang panginoong hesus, halatang kayo ang di makamove on sa tunay na pagkakakilala sa panginoong hesucristo

    ReplyDelete
  19. Pano po ba naging christian ang JEHOVA , hindi nmn pangalan ni cristo dinadala ninyo

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oo nga, kaya ang dapat itawag sa kanila ay JEHOVAN at hindi CHRISTIAN. heheheheh

      Delete
    2. siguro po ito ang tamang tanong: paano po bang naging cristian ang saksi ni jehova?

      bakit saksi ni jehova ang dala namin at hindi iglesia ni cristo?

      ito ang sagot:

      daniel 9-19""sapagkat ang iyong bayan at ang mga tao ay tinatawag sa kanyang pangalan.

      ang nag mamay- ari kasi sa organization namin ang DIOS AT SI CRISTO. katunayan matatawag kaming cristian congregation of jehovah`s witnesses.

      basahin natin kung ano si jesus.

      revelation 1:5" at mula kay jesucristo na siyang saksing tapat"

      tanong saan sya naging saksing tapat?
      tapat sya sa kanyang ama na ang pangalan sa modern translation ay JEHOVA.

      ALAM NYO BA KUNG SINO ANG TOTOONG cristiano?

      ang hindi totoong cristiano si cristo para nilay tao palagi kahit nan doon na sa langit.

      at ang iba naman si cristo ay siyang DIOS MISMO.

      AT NAG TUTURO SILA NANG TRINIDAD.

      ANG MGA ARAL NA ITOY HINDI TUNAY NA CRISTIANO.

      Delete
  20. karagdagan.

    ang tunay na cristian sumunod sa utos ni cristo.

    mateo 24:14 at ipangangaral ang evangeliong ito ng kaharian sa buong sanglibutan sa pagpapatotoo sa lahat ng bansa at kung magkagayoy darating ang wakas.

    juan 13:34"mangagibigan sa isat isa o may pag ibig sa isat isa.

    sumunod sa mga standard morals na tinuturo ng biblia/

    halimbawa: bawal sa amin ang pag yoyosi sa mga inc ba itoy bawal sa inyo?
    maraming mga inc na nagyoyosi.

    baka mag tanong kayo.
    may mabasa ba sa biblia na bawal ang segirelyo? hindi po word for word ang maibigay ko na talata pro kung laliman lang ninyo ang inyong pang unawa malalaman ninyo na itoy bawal.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Sabi mo Shylla,

    “ang tunay na cristian sumunod sa utos ni cristo.

    mateo 24:14 at ipangangaral ang evangeliong ito ng kaharian sa buong sanglibutan sa pagpapatotoo sa lahat ng bansa at kung magkagayoy darating ang wakas.

    juan 13:34"mangagibigan sa isat isa o may pag ibig sa isat isa.”

    halimbawa: bawal sa amin ang pag yoyosi sa mga inc ba itoy bawal sa inyo?
    maraming mga inc na nagyoyosi.”


    Tama, ang tunay na mga Cristiano ang sinusunod si Cristo, kaya nga hindi namin tinatawag na JEHOVA ang Diyos kasi hindi itinuro ni Cristo na tawagin ang Diyos sa PANGALANG INIMBENTO ng mga KATOLIKO…kaya hindi namin iyan ginagawa. WALA KASI SIYANG UTOS NA GANIYAN EH.

    Ngayon tungkol dun sa ibinigay mong talata na:

    mateo 24:14 at ipangangaral ang evangeliong ito ng kaharian sa buong sanglibutan sa pagpapatotoo sa lahat ng bansa at kung magkagayoy darating ang wakas.

    Tupad na tupad sa INC iyan dahil laganap na sa mahigit 80 bansa sa daigdig ang INC at mayoon na itong kaanib na mula sa mahigit 100 Nationality o mga lahi ng mga tao.

    Hindi sa inyo natutupad iyan, kasi bata pa ako matagal ko nang naririnig na sinasabi nung kapitbahay namin na Pioneer sa JW, na kayo daw ay laganap na sa boung daigdig kahit daw iyong mga liblib na lugar ay narating na ninyo.

    Pero ito ang malaking tanong:

    NARATING NIYO NA PALA NOON PA ANG LAHAT NG DAKO SA MUNDO, EH BAKIT HINDI PA NAGWAWAKAS?

    Eh sabi sa Biblia ganito:

    “AT IPANGANGARAL ANG EVANGELIONG ITO NG KAHARIAN SA BUONG SANGLIBUTAN SA PAGPAPATOTOO SA LAHAT NG BANSA AT KUNG MAGKAGAYOY DARATING ANG WAKAS.”

    Kapag naipangaral na sa Buong Daigdig ang EVANGHELIO sabi ni Cristo DARATING NA WAKAS.

    Eh sabi ninyo matagal niyo nang nagawa ito, kaya ang tanong:

    BAKIT HANGGANG NGAYON HINDI PA NAGWAWAKAS?

    SAGOT:

    Kasi hindi sa inyo matutupad iyan kundi sa INC…KASALUKUYAN PA LAMANG KAMING LUMALAGANAP SA BUONG MUNDO…at HINDI PA TAPOS MAABOT NG INC ang LAHAT NG DAKO SA DAIGDIG…kapag nangyari iyon…DUN PA LANG DARATING ANG WAKAS…

    Ano katibayan na hindi kayo ang tinutukoy sa sinabi ni JESUS?

    Una walang mababasa na SAKSI NI JEHOVA diyan, kahit na pagbali-baliktarin mo pa Biblia…

    Sa Biblia tayo magtanong – ALIN BA ANG “KAHARIAN” na tinutukoy ni Cristo na inatangan niya ng tungkulin na ipangaral ang kaniyang EVANGHELIO sa buong daigdig?

    Hindi po tayo ang sasagot niyan, bawal iyon, kailangan ang sumasagot ay SALITA NG DIYOS:

    Colosas 1:12-14 Na nagpapasalamat sa Ama, na nagpaging dapat sa atin upang makabahagi sa mana ng mga banal sa kaliwanagan; Na siyang nagligtas sa atin sa kapangyarihan ng kadiliman, at naglipat sa atin SA KAHARIAN NG ANAK ng kaniyang pagibig; NA SIYANG KINAROROONAN NG ATING KATUBUSAN, NA SIYANG KAPATAWARAN NG ATING MGA KASALANAN:

    Ang sinasabing KAHARIAN ni CRISTO na siyang binigyan ng Tungkulin na maipangaral ang Evanghelio ay ang KAHARIAN ng ANAK o NI CRISTO na KINAROROONAN NG KATUBUSAN.

    Ibig sabihin ito ay ang KAHARIAN NI CRISTO na kaniyang TINUBOS, eh alin po ba iyon?

    Hindi po tayo ang sasagot niyan, gaya ng ating sinasabi, kailangan Biblia:

    Gawa 20:28 “Ingatan ninyo ang inyong mga sarili at ang buong kawan, na rito’y hinirang kayo upang maging mga katiwala, upang pakanin ang IGLESIA NI CRISTO na binili niya ng kaniyang dugo” [Salin sa Filipino – LAMSA VERSION].

    Ang IGLESIA NI CRISTO ang KAHARIAN ng ANAK na BINILI o TINUBOS ng DUGO ni CRISTO….

    Sa INC natupad iyan, at kapag naabot na ng INC ang lahat ng panig ng daigdig, maging ang mga liblib na lugar – ASAHAN MO “DARATING NA ANG WAKAS”…

    ReplyDelete
  22. hahahaha nag ra rumble na ang mga paliwanag mo. kung word for word ang hinahanap mo na may saksi ni jehovah nakalagay sa biblia bigyan kita

    pro anong kondisyon pag nabasa ko?

    tingnan natin kung ang hula na ito tumutukoy ba ito sa inyo?

    sabi sa SALMO"nagbibigay ng salita ang panginoon ang mga babaing nangaghahayag ng mga balita ay malaking hukbo"

    sino lang ba ngayon na relihiyon ang nagpapahayag ng tunay na kaharian ng DIOS? ALAM MO BA KUNG ANO ANG KAHARIAN NG Dios?

    o ang alam mo tao lang palagi si cristo.

    ilan ba ang bansa sa buong mundo?

    pwidi ba bilhin ang iglesia ni cristo ni cristo? o ang akma ,binili ni cristo ang iglesia ng DIOS.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Patunayan mo muna na tamang SALIN ang nakalagay sa sinasabi mong SALMO?

      Delete
  23. Ginawang literal ng word for word ni Christian. Kung ganyan ang basihan mo, si Apostol Pablo din mismo, nagsabi na ang mabuting balita ay naipangaral ng sa buong silong ng langit. Pero hanggang ngayon wala pa ang wakas. Ibig bang sabihin nyan nagkamali si Apostol Pablo? Wag laging word for word Sir Christian. Meron pong word for word talaga sa bible, merong literal at meron din symbolical.

    - MCCXXI™

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Calling all INC. Sagot naman po dito. Sa kabilang thread lang kayo nagko- comment eh. Comment lang, kasi di rin sila makasagot sa tanong ko dun. May tatlong pending questions na kayo mga iho. Kelangan na naman ba ng pagpupulong para masagot 'to? Hala sige pulong pa ulet. Ginawa kasing word for word lahat eh. Kung gusto nyo ng word for word, panu nyo ngayon lulusutan yang sinabi ni Apostol Pablo na yan na "Naipangaral na daw yung mabuting balita sa BUONG silong ng langit"? Hala sige, magpulong.

      - MCCXXI™

      Delete
  24. Sa lahat ng mga taga Iglesia Ng Tanong:

    Wala kayong kwentang katalakayan... Puro lang kayo tanong ng tanong pero hindi nyo kayang sumagot sa mga tanong ko. Sa lahat ng mga nakakabasa nito, tingnan nyo po yung archive nila ng Sept and Oct 2013, makikita nyo po dun na sinagot ko po yung mga tanong nila, pero nung ako na po ang nagtanong, tahimik sila lahat. Ay hindi pala tahimik, nagtanong pala ulet sila. Ahahaha. Hindi kayang sagutin yung mga tanong eh. Or baka nagpupulong pa hanggang ngayon. Malamang pagkatapos ng pulong nyo, may sagot na kayo, pero hindi ko na mababasa. Nakakatamad ng bumisita sa blog na 'to. Palitan nyo pangalan nyo. Wag na INC, kundi sa halip INT nalang. Iglesia Ng Tanong. Mga walang kwenta.

    - MCCXXI™

    ReplyDelete
  25. ang alam ko masama na tinatanong natin ang dios o pinagdududahan ang kanyang mga salita.

    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