Jose Ventilacion

  • Thread starter Thread starter heronimo
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
H

heronimo

Guest
What do you think about Mr. Jose Ventilacion the chief debater of iglesia ni Cristo, while you watch his debate together with Karl Keating in 1990 at San Diego California? Who is the winner?
 
heronimo said:
What do you think about Mr. Jose Ventilacion the chief debater of iglesia ni Cristo, while you watch his debate together with Karl Keating in 1990 at San Diego California? Who is the winner?
Click to expand...
I haven’t seen it yet and I asked CA for a copy 4 years ago but they don’t have it. Knowing how dirty INC in their tactics, they probably had the upper hand, but not in substance.
 
ralphinal said:
And confusing some. And using violence at times, intimadation at others. Really sad
Click to expand...
Do you know that they are the only group in the Philippnes that violent muslims can not threaten, because these guys are well armed and they respond with violence too.
 
A link to the debate was posted here several months ago. I watched it. It was long and painful. Karl was clearly the winner of the debate. Mr. Ventilacion had a few responses that he just kept repeating over and over again, louder each time. I felt bad for him as he is clearly not accustomed to appolgetics debating and was outmatched in material and skill.
 
ferdie said:
Do you know that they are the only group in the Philippnes that violent muslims can not threaten, because these guys are well armed and they respond with violence too.
Click to expand...
Well, I am not surprised. What’s good for the goose, is good for the gander
 
he’s only good when he shouts in the debate… but with no sense at all!
 
karl keating is good. However, it was obvious that karl faces
some jitters of the style of INC, like the mesmashing of logic, premises and conclusions. the INC has the penchant of interrupting the speaker while answering the question during a cross examination. Maybe to distract one’s line
of thinking or blur some points that the other side is expounding. As you can see in the video, Ventilacion’s sidekicks, kept
distracting karl. It’s a cheap trick but sometimes, it works.
Unlike karl’s previous debates against protestants, who keep
their manner intact by refusing to butt in while the speaker
is still talking.

There are several points that karl has the upper hand. But he
did not expound further to corner ventillacion. I could understand some of karl’s minor lapses, it’s because he is so civil and maybe he did not expect the INC would behave that way in the debate.

In my next post, I will stress out some points that karl had the biggest advantage, but he did not go in for the knockout punch; instead, he kept pepeering ventilacion with jabs.

But karl successfully hammered the nail on the head of INC’s doctrine theorists (my term), on the loopholes of the “god’s messenger coming from the fareast” theory.

During the cross, ventilacion asked karl whether the Phil. is
in the fareast, karl replied the country is not. then ventilacion
quoted a book of a priest, which said that the phil. is in the
fareast. Karl responded that the priest was wrong. Karl’s reply stunned Ventilacion. He was expecting that because it was written by a priest, karl would accept it.Karl said the Phil. is
in the southeast not fareast. That’s what the map of the world
shows, replied karl.

Observed the video, Ventilacion made a correction of his claim
during his constructive speech that the phil. is the geographical
center of the fareast.

I could surmised that because of that debate, INC’s doctrine theorists, realized the weakness of using the priest’s book to prove that the Phil. is the geographical center of the fareast.Since (1) the priest is not a geography expert and his book could be outrightly dismissed (2) the world geography shows that the Phil is in the southeast.

Guess what, the INC polished their belief on the messenger-fareast-Phil teaching. In 1999, INC’s official magazine Pasugo
somehow dished out a new reason to plug the holes of its theory. It says that the INC wants to set clear that when it mentioned the word fareast, it doesn’t mean it specifically refers to the Philippines but in reference to the east where the Philippines is part of it.

This is the biggest accomplishment of karl keating in the debate.
 
Here is the link of that debate…enjoy

breakmechrist.blogspot.com/2007/06/iglesia-ni-cristo-vs-catholic-church.html
delaacecruz said:
karl keating is good. However, it was obvious that karl faces
some jitters of the style of INC, like the mesmashing of logic, premises and conclusions. the INC has the penchant of interrupting the speaker while answering the question during a cross examination. Maybe to distract one’s line
of thinking or blur some points that the other side is expounding. As you can see in the video, Ventilacion’s sidekicks, kept
distracting karl. It’s a cheap trick but sometimes, it works.
Unlike karl’s previous debates against protestants, who keep
their manner intact by refusing to butt in while the speaker
is still talking.

There are several points that karl has the upper hand. But he
did not expound further to corner ventillacion. I could understand some of karl’s minor lapses, it’s because he is so civil and maybe he did not expect the INC would behave that way in the debate.

In my next post, I will stress out some points that karl had the biggest advantage, but he did not go in for the knockout punch; instead, he kept pepeering ventilacion with jabs.

But karl successfully hammered the nail on the head of INC’s doctrine theorists (my term), on the loopholes of the “god’s messenger coming from the fareast” theory.

During the cross, ventilacion asked karl whether the Phil. is
in the fareast, karl replied the country is not. then ventilacion
quoted a book of a priest, which said that the phil. is in the
fareast. Karl responded that the priest was wrong. Karl’s reply stunned Ventilacion. He was expecting that because it was written by a priest, karl would accept it.Karl said the Phil. is
in the southeast not fareast. That’s what the map of the world
shows, replied karl.

Observed the video, Ventilacion made a correction of his claim
during his constructive speech that the phil. is the geographical
center of the fareast.

I could surmised that because of that debate, INC’s doctrine theorists, realized the weakness of using the priest’s book to prove that the Phil. is the geographical center of the fareast.Since (1) the priest is not a geography expert and his book could be outrightly dismissed (2) the world geography shows that the Phil is in the southeast.

Guess what, the INC polished their belief on the messenger-fareast-Phil teaching. In 1999, INC’s official magazine Pasugo
somehow dished out a new reason to plug the holes of its theory. It says that the INC wants to set clear that when it mentioned the word fareast, it doesn’t mean it specifically refers to the Philippines but in reference to the east where the Philippines is part of it.

This is the biggest accomplishment of karl keating in the debate.
Click to expand...
 
http://www.maps.com/map.aspx?pid=15556

maps.com/map.aspx?pid=15556

This historic black and white map, entitled “The Philippine Islands as the Geographical Center of the Far East,” shows the Far East in 1900–two years after the Philippines were taken, then purchased from Spain by the US following the Spanish American War.

Appearing in the January 1900 issue of the National Geographic Magazine, this Philippines map has been reproduced from its original cartography in order to bring to life a beautiful poster previously only seen in National Geographic Magazine. This reproduction holds true to the high standards that National Geographic Maps are known for
 
another link on the debate, Jose Ventilacion said that Felix Manalo is the Shepherd of the Flock and not Jesus Christ.

youtube.com/watch?v=3Rme4Qn5W1k&NR=1

Listen Carefully at 2:09 mins:
Ventilacion said: “There is only one flock. There is one church. There is only one shepherd. That shepherd is Bro. Felix Manalo, not Jesus Christ because Christ said, there will be, and that is in the future”
marlo said:
Here is the link of that debate…enjoy

breakmechrist.blogspot.com/2007/06/iglesia-ni-cristo-vs-catholic-church.html
Click to expand...
 
“Far East” mostly equivalent to East Asia (including the Russian Far East) and Southeast Asia. Philippines is in the Southeast of Asia…“Fareast” of the world…

Far East
Brunei, Cambodia, People’s Republic of China, Republic of China, East Timor Hong Kong, PRC, Indonesia, Japan, Laos, Macau, Malaysia, North Korea, Philippines, Singapore, South Korea, Thailand, Vietnam
 
I saw how the heretic Ventilacion really showcased the tactics of these members of the Iglesia ni Manalo (No, they are not the Iglesia ni Cristo which means Church of Christ, it is in fact, the RCC) in debating. He has poor debating etiquette. He loves to throw questions which he insist Mr. Keating answer only by yes or no, thus trapping Mr. Keating in his own statement (fallacy of plurium interrogatorium), Ventilacion love to quote some statements from Catholic literature and uses that as evidence either contrary to what he says about the bible or contrary to Mr. Keating’s positions (Fallacy of false attribution). Ventilacion used wrong contexts in reading Bible verses and statements from Catholic Literature (Fallacy of Contextomy); he also used multiple arguments against a particular Church teaching and his arguments are quite inconsistent (Kettle logic fallacy). If I were a debater, I would rather say in the first statement of the Debate that I declare myself defeated, than to debate with this debater who cheats off with his debating skills (if ever you would call it a skill).
 
Hi there, hope everone’s having a good day!!!
Well I have been an INC insider for the past few years as part of my research.
Jose Ventilacion is their hero, for they believe he upheld the beliefs of the INCs by winning debates…
He has skills, but actually used it in the evil way of sorts.
This thread should be relating to the INC as a whole, eventhough there were numerous discussions before about the matter.
They can debate only with Catholics who aren’t trained nor skilled with debating. Catholics who engage in discussions know they are right but has difficulty presenting their side. This proves more difficult if they engage with the INC debate masters, who can make lies look like truth. Masters of deception, really.
The debate by the way is also available on Youtube, but I do not have the link.
An INC member who dropped by this forum has a link as well you can visit, but that is pretty useless. If you paste anything not sounding sweet to their ears or visitors, it will be scrapped.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top