E
e61iuser
Guest
Too bad your conversion story is in Cebuano. I’d love to hear it in either English or Tagalog.
- Status
R
rtibs
Guest
A cult is usually formed around the personality of the founder or head. Pastor A. Quibuloy’s group could be rightly called a cult, esp. since his teachings promote the idea that he is God’s son and that the new Jerusalem is in Davao. INC says that Christ is just a man and that Manalo is an angel. Over the years, the teachings evolved such that less and less of the founder’s original concepts are promoted esp. since he is no longer alive. INC was able to lend itself the generic iglesia or church and even quotes literally from the KJV even as most of its teachings are expounded on their magazine Pasugo. These are known to most Catholics and maybe as a corporation sole, it was able to detach itself from the person of Manalo and could say, that today, it is not a cult.
J
jamil_joseph02
Guest
J
Joero
Guest
I’ve heard that the names of the seven angels are Judiel, Michael, Rafael, Oriel, Barrachel, Gabriel and Ziltiel.
Felix Manalo is an angel!? That’s a world record!
Hurray!!! Another Filipino! So, not only in the world of Boxing but also in the Angelic World!!! Hurray!!!
L
Lapulapu
Guest
In terms of accolade and fame, Manny Paquiao is just second to Felix Manalo because he was an angel since 1914. But Pastor A. Quibuloy is above them all because he is the son of God.I’ve heard that the names of the seven angels are Judiel, Michael, Rafael, Oriel, Barrachel, Gabriel and Ziltiel.
Felix Manalo is an angel!? That’s a world record!
Hurray!!! Another Filipino! So, not only in the world of Boxing but also in the Angelic World!!! Hurray!!!
G
gookykookypig
Guest
You must join the friendster group, “100% KATOLIKONG PINOY!” if you really want to find outHi gookykookypig
why did you decided to leave INC?
Or maybe you can listen to my recorded interview in Cebuano in the link I gave.
God bless you, mga katolikong pinoy. Please visit our blog:
R
rtibs
Guest
lolrotf. hopefully manny p. won’t get any such ridiculous spiritual ideas, other than a political wannabe. But seriously, there will not be an end to cults for as long as people see success crowns their heads. I mean look at their impressive cathedrals, no wonder they’re still around since 1914! Jesus said “Watch out that you are not deceived. For many will come in my name, claiming I am he… do not follow them” (Lk 21:8).In terms of accolade and fame, Manny Paquiao is just second to Felix Manalo because he was an angel since 1914. But Pastor A. Quibuloy is above them all because he is the son of God.
L
Lapulapu
Guest
The INC was founded in 1914 somewhere in Manila. Most of their Pastors and subordinates are well-versed with regard to their teaching in the Bible, for they are also Bible based denom like the others. It spreads out in Manila area and its vicinity until it reached the Visayas regions as well as some parts of Mindanao. They were just lucky that people during those times do not know about the Bible and there were no teaching of Apologetics before. Even the well educated Catholics cannot outsmart their preachers in terms of biblical knowhow. That is one of the reasons why they are still alive and kicking until at present.
J
jamil_joseph02
Guest
yes but how do I prove a member of a cult that his/her denomination is a cult? I mean, what do I have to say for him/her to be convinced?
L
Lapulapu
Guest
The word “cult “ has many meanings in dictionary. Both the INC and the Catholic Church fall on one of those meanings. So in order not to mislead others, it would be appropriate to say that their own “private interpretation of the bible “ made them different and distinct from other Christian religions.
Jesus Christ for them is just a mere human being and Felix Manalo was the angel basing Isaiah 46: 11 ( which actually refers to King Ciro of Persia ).
J
jamil_joseph02
Guest
well that means they are making Manalo’s position **higher than **God(Jesus) himself!The word “cult “ has many meanings in dictionary. Both the INC and the Catholic Church fall on one of those meanings. So in order not to mislead others, it would be appropriate to say that their own “private interpretation of the bible “ made them different and distinct from other Christian religions.
Jesus Christ for them is just a mere human being and Felix Manalo was the angel basing Isaiah 46: 11 ( which actually refers to King Ciro of Persia ).
Eli Soriano’s followers also make their leader equal with our Lord Jesus. In their TV program, DX man, their song goes “ngunit ngayon ay aming nakilala ang sinugo ng Dios Ama na **may tangan ng aral ng kaligtasan **na inaasam nating lahat!” which translates in English “but now we’ve known the **messenger God the Father has sent **who has the **doctrines of salvation **that we are hoping for”. I’ve checked out their videos in youtube and I didn’t see their english translation so I’ve translated the song myself. But that’s not the bottomline the bottomline is that they still make their leader equal to Jesus not only by attributing him “sinugo ng Dios Ama” but also “may tangan ng aral ng kaligtasan”.
If Soriano is indeed the messenger God has sent, then why don’t he crucify himself to the cross and save us?! Of course, thesame goes for Manalo and Quiboloy. I mean, Jesus is enough for us, and we don’t need these false messengers.
R
rtibs
Guest
We are told by St. Paul, to be careful how we build “…for no one can lay any foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ”…(1 Cor 3:10-15). All these so-called “messengers” do is build over that which Jesus has already built, but their works will be brought to light and/or tested with fire. If they survive, they will receive their rewards. God’s eternal mercy will save them “but only as one escaping through the flames”. Let us all pray, on that Day Jesus himself can say to us, “Come, blessed ones, inherit the kingdom prepared for you… whatever you have done to the least of my brethren, you have done also to me…”.
L
Lapulapu
Guest
Elie Soriano made the name of his group “DATING DAAN” basing from Jer. 6: 16 (Ancient Path). But the “Ancient Path” in Jer. 6: 16 refers to the Mosaical Laws because the Israelites at that time didn’t follow the Old covenant and went strayed from the Lord’s will. This is again another form of “private interpretation of biblical verses “.
His teaching should have focused only basing on the Old Covenant, if the correct interpretation of Jer. 6: 16 be followed.
His teaching should have focused only basing on the Old Covenant, if the correct interpretation of Jer. 6: 16 be followed.
L
Lapulapu
Guest
I quoted for you an excerpt from a source which concurs to your interpretation of the little horn in Daniel chapter 7.
quote:
Daniel 8: Male Goat & Ram
Ram with Two Horns (vs. 3,4): MEDIA-PERSIA (vs. 20). Note the two horns’ similarity to two shoulders of the bear in chapter 7. Just as one of the bear’s two shoulders was higher than the other (7:5), so also one of the ram’s two horns is longer than the other (8:3). This kingdom did in fact expand northward, southward, and westward.
Male Goat (vs. 5-8a): GREECE (vs. 21). Compare the description in 7:6 (“leopard with four wings of a bird”) to 8:5 (“without touching the ground”)—speed. The large horn is Alexander the Great, who defeated the Persians in three decisive battles in 334,333,331 BC. He died at the height of his power at 33 years old in 323 BC. Vs 8b,22 describe his four generals who divided his kingdom (“Give it to the strong”): Seleucus (Syria and lands to the east), Ptolemy (Egypt, Palestine and Arabia), Lysimachus (Turkey), and Cassander (Macedonia and Greece). During the Inter-testamental period, the Seleucid and Ptolemaic kingdoms took turns controlling Palestine because of its strategic importance on the trade route.
The “little horn” is the Seleucid king Antiochus IV (Epiphanes), who ruled over Palestine 175-164 BC. What is his relationship to the “little horn” in chapter 7?
Similarities between him and the “little horn” of chapter 7: boasters (7:20; 8:11,25), “little horn” (7:8; 8:9), fight with saints (7:25; 8:24).
Differences from the “little horn” of chapter 7: They emerge from different kingdoms (AC is from fourth in Dan. 7; AE is from third in Dan. 8), and their period of dominance over Israel is of different duration (AC is 3.5 years; AE is 6.5 years/2300 days).
Resolution: Antiochus IV is a Type of the Anti-Christ, which is inferred by 8:17,19 (“pertains to time the end”).
8:11-14 was fulfilled when Antiochus IV removed the high priest Onias III from 171 BC until 164 BC (2300 days), when Antiochus died. The “abomination of desolation” (vs. 13: “the transgression causes horror”) occurred on December 25, 167 BC, when Antiochus IV sacrificed a swine on the altar of the temple. This sacrilege precipitated the Maccabean Revolt (see Josephus, Antiquities, Book XII, Chapter 5; 1 Macc. 4:34ff.).
Daniel 9: The Prince Who Is To Come
Vs 24: Summary of the entire 70 “weeks” and what will happen afterwards (the millennial kingdom).
Daniel receives this vision in 538 BC (9:1), as the Jews are nearing the end of their 70 year exile for disregarding the land Sabbaths (9:2; see also Lev. 25:1-7; 26:34,35,43; 2 Chron. 36:20,21).
This context is the key to understanding the “weeks” as weeks of years. The Jews had disregarded the land Sabbath law for 490 years, since God exiled them one year for every land Sabbath disregarded. Now, God reveals to Daniel the next 490 years of his dealings with Israel.
Vs 25: Summary of the first 69 “weeks”—7 “weeks” for the rebuilding of Jerusalem, and 62 “weeks” intervening between the completion and Messiah.
The only decree that authorized a full rebuilding of Jerusalem (including fortifications) was the one given in 444 BC by Artexerxes Langimanus (see Neh. 2:1-8).
Converting from Daniel’s 360-day lunar years to our present solar years makes 69 “weeks” just over 476 years long. Crossing from BC to AD requires that we move one year further because there is no “zero” year. This brings us to 33 AD, the very year that Jesus rode into Jerusalem and was hailed as Messiah by the multitude of disciples (see Luke 19:35-44). Notice that when Jesus predicts the destruction of Jerusalem in Luke 19:42-44, he is merely repeating what Daniel predicted on Dan. 9:26 (see below).
Vs 26: The gap of time between the 69th and 70th “weeks.” The break from describing this period as pertaining to the weeks strongly implies that it should be viewed as a gap of unspecified duration. During this gap, Messiah will be rejected and killed, the people of the prince to come (i.e., the Romans) will destroy Jerusalem and the Temple, and there will be many wars over Jerusalem. This corresponds exactly to the “gap” already deduced in chapters 2 and 7. Jesus calls this same period “the times of the Gentiles” which begins when the Romans destroy Jerusalem (Lk. 21:24)—in other words, the Church Age.
The “prince who is to come” who desolates the Temple (9:26,27) has already been mentioned in chapter 7 (“little horn”) and will be mentioned in chapter 11. This is clearly the Anti-Christ who emerges from the Roman Empire and who is judged by God himself immediately before he sets up Messiah’s kingdom (9:24,27). He is from the “people” who will destroy Jerusalem—the Roman general Titus fulfilled this in 70 AD, which Jesus also predicted in Lk. 19,21.
J
Joero
Guest
That’s great and thank you!
It is very important because that would eliminate incorrect interpretation of the little horn in Daniel chapter 7 by those unscrupulous who, preposterously, refers the little horn to the papacy.
It would also encourage anybody to ponder upon that the Catholic Church, with deeper studies on the chapters 2 & 7 of Daniel, had its valuable historical/biblical references from the very beginning, in the world of the gentiles, specifically, in the pagan Roman Empire. the Stone that broke loose and struck the feet of the statue…(Daniel 2: 34) ].
G
gookykookypig
Guest
Once again I’ll quote what I have said:
J
Joero
Guest
Bro. Francis, I think there’s nothing wrong with that if youy are really a Roman Catholic by heart because it does not insinuate any other sort of christian religion in order for anyone who happens to read our posts to think we were impostors.
This is an Apologetic site for Filipinos, and as a Filipino and a Catholic Faith Defender I am bound to say what is appropriate for the benefit of my brother Filipino Roman Catholics.
If you feel not comfortable of our posts, then give your own interpretation of the little horn in Daniel Chapter 7. You will find out that we will not bother you if that’s what you believe in.
L
Lapulapu
Guest
I don’t want to be part of this sort of misunderstanding here!
I’m out of this.
Just feel free to correct me if I’m wrong, Francis! That’s okay with me.
I’m out of this.
Just feel free to correct me if I’m wrong, Francis! That’s okay with me.
G
gookykookypig
Guest
@Joero,
What’s wrong with you, brother? Did my post insult you? Did I say that you were impostors? Look, if you’re a Catholic faith Defender and a catholic well you must know that I am, too. I am a Catholic Faith Defender and a close pal of our present National President Atty. Miguel Abas. See: hundredpercentkatolikongpinoy.blogspot.com/2009/04/atty-mike-at-55.html
What’s wrong with you two is you’re too stubborn with your stand, forgetting that the scripture is not a smug source at all and it doesn’t need to be interpreted by the laity but only by authority, the Church. Even the Church avoids interpreting the “sign of the times” (to keep he caution) unlike the doomsayer sects! We CFD are too boastful on saying things, yes I understand, for we must equip ourselves of what we have to answer back to our separated brethren if in any way they will question us. The “little horn” can be either Antiochus Epiphanes or Titus whomever you prefer. Do you know? Do you have an angel with you to tell you who it is? Are you sure the source is not corrupted in any way?
I am insulted with what you posted, Joero. It seems that you never flourished in Catholic virtue of defending at all. A true Catholic Faith Defender is at first, must defend his personality from others. It seemed that you failed in that by accusing me of some things. Argumentum ad hominem. Well, as for me, I am there spilling the beans out of the open while you stay here in this whimsical thread.
Go out from here and defend your faith in the mainline apologetic threads!
What’s wrong with you, brother? Did my post insult you? Did I say that you were impostors? Look, if you’re a Catholic faith Defender and a catholic well you must know that I am, too. I am a Catholic Faith Defender and a close pal of our present National President Atty. Miguel Abas. See: hundredpercentkatolikongpinoy.blogspot.com/2009/04/atty-mike-at-55.html
What’s wrong with you two is you’re too stubborn with your stand, forgetting that the scripture is not a smug source at all and it doesn’t need to be interpreted by the laity but only by authority, the Church. Even the Church avoids interpreting the “sign of the times” (to keep he caution) unlike the doomsayer sects! We CFD are too boastful on saying things, yes I understand, for we must equip ourselves of what we have to answer back to our separated brethren if in any way they will question us. The “little horn” can be either Antiochus Epiphanes or Titus whomever you prefer. Do you know? Do you have an angel with you to tell you who it is? Are you sure the source is not corrupted in any way?
I am insulted with what you posted, Joero. It seems that you never flourished in Catholic virtue of defending at all. A true Catholic Faith Defender is at first, must defend his personality from others. It seemed that you failed in that by accusing me of some things. Argumentum ad hominem. Well, as for me, I am there spilling the beans out of the open while you stay here in this whimsical thread.
Go out from here and defend your faith in the mainline apologetic threads!
J
Joero
Guest
Francis:
Look! When it comes to defending the Catholic faith, you have not tested yet what we had gone thru during our younger days when the Iglesia ni Cristo at that time were so aggressive that they would make troubles if they felt that they were on the losing side. We got bruises, wounds and sorts like that. There was no CFD before.
Look what you are doing, you talked as if you are at my age level. I am very much older than you, bro. In fact your age is like the age of my sons and daughters.
Look at my post and read twice or thrice if I hurt you that much as what you did to me…
You are acting as if I am your worst enemy you’ve ever had. You are like an enemy hiding in silence waiting for his supposed victim to make a single mistake and strike to death.
I am not afraid if you are a close pal of the National President. Go ahead if you want drastic action against me. My posts will prove that I had not done wrong to you and to the teaching of the Catholic Church. My age and my physical condition doesn’t need to be on the street as what I did before, I need to rest anyway.
The viewer of this thread would be the one to decide if who, between us, has done worst to his brethren. I had gone to the mainline apologetic bro., infact my posts on my profile can prove it. I just stay a while on this thread, as you said the whimsical thread, due to my physical condition.
Look! When it comes to defending the Catholic faith, you have not tested yet what we had gone thru during our younger days when the Iglesia ni Cristo at that time were so aggressive that they would make troubles if they felt that they were on the losing side. We got bruises, wounds and sorts like that. There was no CFD before.
Look what you are doing, you talked as if you are at my age level. I am very much older than you, bro. In fact your age is like the age of my sons and daughters.
Look at my post and read twice or thrice if I hurt you that much as what you did to me…
You are acting as if I am your worst enemy you’ve ever had. You are like an enemy hiding in silence waiting for his supposed victim to make a single mistake and strike to death.
I am not afraid if you are a close pal of the National President. Go ahead if you want drastic action against me. My posts will prove that I had not done wrong to you and to the teaching of the Catholic Church. My age and my physical condition doesn’t need to be on the street as what I did before, I need to rest anyway.
The viewer of this thread would be the one to decide if who, between us, has done worst to his brethren. I had gone to the mainline apologetic bro., infact my posts on my profile can prove it. I just stay a while on this thread, as you said the whimsical thread, due to my physical condition.
- Status