Fr. Daniel J. McNamara, S.J., during one of our walks years ago, told us: “The Iglesia ni Cristo is neither a church nor of Christ.” It is worthwhile to ponder on his words as Iglesia ni Cristo (INC) celebrates its 95th Anniversary last July 27, 2009–95 years after Felix Y. Manalo made the INC into a corporation with him as the executive minister last July 27, 1914.
A true church of Christ has four marks: one, holy, Catholic, apostolic (c.f. Catechism of the Catholic Church Art. 811 ). If one of this does not hold, then the Iglesia ni Cristo is a false church of Christ.
1. Is the Iglesia ni Cristo one? The INC is is united in doctrine and even in voting. No wonder many politicians who wished to be reelected this coming 2010 elections are all congratulating INC in its 95th anniversary. The INC passed the first test.
2. Is the Iglesia ni Cristo holy? The Catholic Church has produced numerous saints: beggars and kings, scholars and soldiers, old and young. Can the INC name at least one–only one–person in all its history whom they consider as a saint, a man or woman worthy of emulation, whose life reflected the radical message of the gospel–a Mother Teresa, an Ignatius of Loyola, a Francis of Assisi? The INC can give none.
3. Is the Iglesia ni Cristo catholic? Catholicity simply means universal. The INC is universal in space: the INC is now found in many countries and its mission is to convert the whole world. But the INC is not universal in time: where was INC in the first centuries of Christianity, when the truths of the Faith were debated and clarified? The INC was not there. It is true that INC proclaims an affinity with the teachings of Bishop Arius (AD 250-336), the founder of Arianism, a heresy which denies the divinity of Christ. But between Arius and Manalo is 1,600 years of absence.
Catholic also means “according to totality” or “in keeping with the whole” (Catechism of the Catholic Church Art. 830):
The Catholic Church is catholic because Christ is present in her. “Where there is Christ Jesus, there is the Catholic Church.” In her subsists the fullness of Christ’s body united with its head; this implies that she receives from him “the fullness of the means of salvation” which he has willed: correct and complete confession of faith, full sacramental life, and ordained ministry of apostolic succession. The Church was, in this fundamental sense, catholic on the day of Pentecost and will always be so until the day of Parousia.
The INC also claims this catholicity, for they also adopt the following catholic doctrine:
Ouside the church there is no salvation.
I remembered one of INC’s television show called Tamang Daan, the Right Way in contrast to Eli Soriano’s Datin Daan or the Old Way. In their show, one of INC’s argument to support their doctrine is a quotation from a catholic author: “Outside the Church of Christ there is no salvation.” The two INC ministers–always two since two is the sign of Socratic dialogue for knowing the truth–will tell the readers that the text they are quoting has the imprimatur of the Catholic Church. Then they make a twist of Faith: translate this sentence in Filipino and you will see that “Outside Iglesia ni Cristo there is no salvation.” Oh, what a proof.
4. Is the Iglesia ni Cristo apostolic? To be apostolic, the INC must be founded by an apostle, in the same way as the Roman Catholic Church was founded by Apostles Peter and Paul. But the fact that INC only celebrated its 95th founding anniversary means that INC could never be founded by an apostle. An apostle was a person sent by Christ with the authority to preach the Kingdom of God (c.f. Mt 10). The apostles in turn ordained bishops and gave them authority to govern the church, as Timothy was ordained by Paul through the laying of the hands:
Do not neglect the gift you have, which was conferred on you through the prophetic word with the imposition of hands of the presbyterate. (1 Tim 4:14)
And these bishops in turn ordain new bishops to take their place. The Roman Catholic Church, for example, is apostolic because it traces its apostolic lineage from St. Peter, the first bishop of Rome, to the present pope, Pope Benedict XVI. But who ordained Manalo? Who laid hands on him? No one. He ordained himself. Oh, I made a mistake. Protestant pastors ordained him (full story by Emily Jordan). But INC never recognizes the Protestant faith. Mainline Protestants at least believes on the Divinity of Christ, which the INC reject. This itself poses a question on the validity of the Manalo’s ordination. (The validity of the Protestant minister’s apostolic succession is a separate issue.) So effectively, no one ordained Manalo. He ordained himself.
5. Thus, the Iglesia ni Cristo posesses only one mark of the true Church of Christ: it is one, but it is not holy, nor catholic, nor apostolic. Let us not be deceived. Not all those who are named Manny Pacquiao can box like the real Manny Pacquiao. Not all those who calls themselves the Church of Christ or Iglesia ni Cristo is the true Church of Christ. Only the Catholic Church is. The Church of Iglesia ni Cristo is a false church, an Anti-Church. The Christ of Iglesia ni Cristo is an Arian idol, an Anti-Christ. Let us not be deceived.
Posted by SEEKER on August 4, 2009 at 10:29 pm
This article was made to satisfy the INSECURITIES of the AUTHOR to the INC.
Try to search for more literature.
Your research was bias.
Don’t fool the readers, just fool yourself…
Posted by Quirino M. Sugon Jr on August 5, 2009 at 12:41 pm
If I have spoken wrongly, testify to the wrong; but if I have spoken rightly, why do you strike me? (c.f. Jn 18:23)
Posted by Catholic Defender on August 5, 2009 at 6:04 pm
Great insight. May God bless you. I posted your article not to satisfy my insecurites but to satisfy my hunger for truth..
Posted by SEEKER on August 6, 2009 at 7:35 pm
try to settle first the rape cases against
your priests and bishops.
Be independent don’t ask money came from gambling just to
build a house of worship of yours…(PAGCOR PHILIPPINES support the Catholic’s projects)
Try to be consistent in your doctrines….
prohibiting priests to marry and abstaining catholics from eating meat during lent are Demon’s doctrines.
…before making any rotten opinions about INC…
Posted by Quirino M. Sugon Jr on August 7, 2009 at 10:12 am
Seeker, I suggest you focus on the issue: is the Iglesia ni Cristo the true Church of Christ? The Catholic church is both a church of sinners and saints, and they can only be separated on the last day, as Jesus explained in the parable of the weeds and the wheat (Mt 13). Instead of just saying “try to be consistent with your doctrines,” tell me what particular doctrines are inconsistent. Prohibiting priests to marry may be hard saying, but Jesus said:
As for abstinence from meat and fasting for some days during Lent, these are small sacrifices compared to fasting for forty days and forty nights as Christ did, before he was tempted three times by the devil (Mt 4). We Catholics only wish to follow what Christ did. “Man does not live on bread alone but by every word that comes forth from the mouth of God.” (Mt 4:4)
Posted by SEEKER on August 7, 2009 at 9:32 pm
1 Timothy 4:1-3
Some Will Depart from the Faith
Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons, through the insincerity of liars whose consciences are seared, who forbid marriage and require abstinence from foods that God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth.
TEACHING OF DEMONS:
1.FORBID MARRIAGE
2. REQUIRE ABSTINENCE FROM FOODS THAT GOD CREATED (abstinence from eating meat during lent)
prove to me that your doctrines are not from demons?
the BIBLE proved…
not my own statement…
not my own opinion…
Don’t seek just for intelligence, seek for wisdom….
Posted by Quirino M. Sugon Jr on August 8, 2009 at 12:27 pm
Seeker, thank you for your precise questions.
1. The Catholic Church does not forbid marriage, because one of its Sacraments is Marriage or Matrimony. Celibacy is not a doctrine but a disciplinary rule for priests in the Latin-Rite (Roman) Catholic Church; in Byzantine-Rite Catholic Church, married priests are the norm, but bishops are normally unmarried. St. Paul himself encourages celibacy:
“To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is well for them to remain single as I am. But if they cannot exercise self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to be aflame with passion” (1 Cor 7:8-9).
The Roman Catholic Church wishes its priests not to marry so that they can follow Christ more closely by “renouncing marriage for the sake of the kingdom of heaven.” (Mt 19:12)
What Paul refers to in the teaching of demons which forbid marriage are those of the gnostic sects who thinks that matter is evil and spirit is good. They also think that sexual immorality is good, so they forbid marriages.
2. The phrase “abstinence from foods that God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth” refer to the issue of abstinence from meat offered to idols in the time of Paul. Concerning this issue, Paul said:
“Eat anything sold in the market, without raising questions on grounds of conscience, for “the earth and its fullness are the Lord’s.” If an unbeliever invites you and you want to go, eat whatever is placed before you, without raising questions on grounds of conscience. But if someone says to you, “This was offered in sacrifice,” do not eat it on account of the one who called attention to it and on account of conscience; I mean not your own conscience, but the other’s. For why should my freedom be determined by someone else’s conscience? If I partake thankfully, why am I reviled for that over which I give thanks? So whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do everything for the glory of God. Avoid giving offense, whether to Jews or Greeks or the church of God, just as I try to please everyone in every way, not seeking my own benefit but that of the many, that they may be saved. (1 Cor 10:25-33)
But during Lent, the Church commemorates the suffering and death of our Lord Jesus Christ. Before his death, Christ told his disciples:
“So you could not keep watch with me for one hour? Watch and pray that you may not undergo the test. 26 The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak.” (Mt 26:40-41)
To overcome the tests or temptations of the devil, Christ fasted for forty days and forty nights (Mt 4:2) But the disciples were not able to, not even just to pray with Jesus for one hour. So when the trial came and Jesus was arrested, all them fled and Peter even denied Jesus three times. Fasting (not eating a meal) has a function: it strengthens our spirit against temptations. If we could not fast, the second best thing to do is to refrain from eating what we love to eat, and that is meat (you can still eat fish). The Catholic Church is prudent that it prescribes abstinence from meat all Fridays of the year and fasting only during certain days of Lent (only one full meal for the whole day). The money saved by the person from his fasting and abstinence he then gives as alms to beggars or to charitable institutions.
As an aside, even modern culture have realized the value of fasting and abstinence, not for spiritual reasons, but for keeping ourselves healthy: fasting and abstinence from meat removes excess body fat.
Posted by Seeker on August 9, 2009 at 10:23 pm
hahahaha…
A hidden Agenda…
your an Ang Dating Daan Member…
Defending Catholic Faiths is just your front, to hide your really aim in this blog…:
that is to put INC down….
But, nothing to say but sorry……
decades are passed since ADD attacked and criticize INC…
but where are ADD’s now?
What is INC now?
try to infer, between the two..
And prove and see to your own self that your just wasting your time…….
5 years from now INC will reach her Centennial year…..
and who will to destroy INC…?
You? All of you? All of you who are very insecure to INC? All of you who are dreaming that time will come INC will collapse and be ruin.
Who do you think you are?
Are you God?
God is with INC…
proven, tested, seen…
this God’s work will continue to be dynamic…
Stop practicing Crab mentality…
If your church now is near to its end…. accept it….!
That’s the only way to move-on and search for the truth bro…
thanks….
Posted by Quirino M. Sugon Jr on August 10, 2009 at 10:37 am
Seeker, thank you very much for the wonderful dialogue. I am not and never was a Dating Daan member, but a Catholic by birth and, with God’s grace, will be also at death. Since Nov 2008, this is my only post about Iglesia ni Cristo; all the rest are about Philippine Jesuits, Catholic Churches, the Traditional Latin Mass, and the Reproductive Health Bill. If you like, I may write more about INC and Dating Daan.
If 100 years of INC existence proves that God is with INC, what does 2000 years of Catholic history prove? If having millions of members prove that God is with INC, what does 1 billion (1,000,000,000 or 1,000 million) Catholics prove?
Here is my prayer for you for your journey in search for Truth:
May the road rise up to meet you,
may the wind be always at your back,
May the sun shine warm upon your face,
and the rain fall soft upon your fields,
and until we meet again,
May God hold you in the palm of His hand.
–Traditional Irish blessing
Posted by SEEKER on August 10, 2009 at 7:42 pm
Don’t be shallow….
i never stated in my post that quantity matters…..
nor age matters….
nor 1 000 000 000 and 2000 years matter….
Your Boasting 2 000 years?
2000 years of worshiping Graven IMAGES?
2000 years of Believing that The FATHER, SON and the Holy Spirit are one….
2000 years of Praying that the soul of the dead will either go to HEAVEN, PURGATORY and hell?
Even the word PURGATORY nor TRINITY are not found in the BIBLE…..
and How sure you are, that you already reached 2000 years older?
my point here is that INC will face ALL of you…. you, who want’s to destroy the name of INC….
You branded INC as ANTI CHURCH and ANTI CHRIST…
But I am not offended nor feel any Anger… because I know that
sometimes IGNORANCE must be prevail first before WISDOM….
by the way I want you to post a reply here which include about INC and ADD…
I just want an assurance that your not an ADD member…
Try to infer please…. I need an urgent reply…
Thanks and Gob Bless…
P.S you have mention Manny Pacquiao please watch this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fbD64dOC25U
Posted by Roxanne on August 11, 2009 at 11:07 am
To agree with their fallacious human doctrines the Iglesia ni Cristo misappropriates and misinterprets the verses of Holy Scriptures. These errors have existed from the earliest centuries and the Catholic Church was always gloriously triumphant over them. Let them read the writings of the earliest Church Fathers regarding these heresies and errors.
Regarding the Church, Christ Jesus our Lord and our God has said, “So I now say to you: You are Peter and on this rock I will build my Church. And the gates of the underworld can never hold out against it.” (Mt.16:18)
Indeed the gates of hell can never prevail against the Church because of the most powerful intercession of our Immaculate Mother and Queen. “The Immaculate is She who in Her unbounded and respectful love wills the glory of God, fights the battles of God for overcoming evil, for the triumph of good, crushes the head of hell’s monster and destroys all heresies in the whole world.” (St. Maximilian Kolbe)
If our hearts are obstinate and proud Truth cannot make its dwelling in us. To those who want to seek the truth let them seek it in humility of heart.
Posted by Quirino M. Sugon Jr on August 11, 2009 at 3:20 pm
Seeker, thank you again for your additional points, though I wish you would raise them one by one, so that we can discuss each one in depth. Allow me to answer them one by one as short as possible:
1. Catholics do not worship graven images but respectfully venerates them. Here is what the Catechism say:
“Religious worship is not directed to images in themselves, considered as mere things, but under their distinctive aspect as images leading us on to God incarnate. The movement toward the image does not terminate in it as image, but tends toward that whose image it is.”
In other words, we do not worship the image of Christ but the Christ represented by the man nailed on the cross. We do not worship the saints nor their images but we ask their help, kneeling if possible, for even a young man kneels before his beloved or a knight before his Queen. In both cases, kneeling is not an act of worship but of humility and respect. The image of the saints only help us remember who they are, in the same way as the image of Manalo helps you to remember who he is.
Even God commands the Israelites to look at the bronze serpent that they may be healed (Num 21:9). This bronze serpent, the sign of death, God uses as an instrument for healing, in the same way as the cross, the sign of death, God uses as an instrument for salvation. As Christ said:
“And just as Moses lifted up 5 the serpent in the desert, so must the Son of Man be lifted up, so that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life.” (Jn 3:14-15)
2. The Dogma of Trinity states that there are “Three persons in one God.” So even if the word Trinity is not in the Bible, the concept of three persons in one God can be deduced from the Bible. Jesus commanded his disciples to baptize “in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Spirit” (Mt 28:19). Notice that it is “name” not “names,” so there is only one God, though the Father is distinct from the Son, and so is the Holy Spirit from the two. This is a mystery. No one can fully understand the Trinity unless you are God Himself.
Christ also prayed to the Father: ” And I have given them the glory you gave me, so that they may be one, as we are one, I in them and you in me, that they may be brought to perfection as one, that the world may know that you sent me, and that you loved them even as you loved me” (Jn 17:22-23) The Holy Spirit is the Love between the Father and the Son.
3. Catholics pray for the souls of the dead in Purgatory, that they may be cleansed from their sins, so that they may go to Heaven, where “nothing unclean may enter” (c.f. Rev 21:27). The word Purgatory is not in the Bible, but logic suggests it should exist, whatever its name is irrelevant: Since nothing impure, even those who commit the slightest (venial) sin, can enter heaven, even though they have not committed the gravest (mortal) sins to be sent to Hell, where would they go? This is the Good News of the Catholic Faith: we ordinary people (neither saints or terrible sinners) can still go to heaven, but we have to be purged of our sins first (“Purga” in Tagalog refers to the removal of or cleansing from intestinal worms which may be likened to sin in the soul). Those who are in Purgatory are assured of going to heaven, though they have to wait for a while.
Catholics do not pray for the souls in Hell; they are damned forever. Catholics do not pray for the souls in heaven; rather the souls in heaven (saints or holy ones) pray for us that we may go to heaven, too. This is the Catholic doctrine of Communion of the Saints in the Apostles Creed.
4. The Bible was made by the Catholic church. Why was the Gospel of Judas, of Peter, and of Barnabas not included in the Bible? Because the Catholic Church said so in the Council of Carthage in 397 A.D. “There are also many other things that Jesus did, but if these were to be described individually, I do not think the whole world would contain the books that would be written” (Jn 21:25) Only the Catholic Church can interpret the Bible and no one else, for the church is “the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of truth.” (This is similar to the Supreme Court being the official interpreter of the Constitution.) Ang Dating Daan (ADD) uses this phrase as the official name of their church but it is not the church referred to here (ADD did not exist in the time of Paul): ADD only misappropriated this title of the Catholic Church in the same way as Iglesia ni Cristo misappropriates to itself the title “Church of Christ”. The Catholic church is the final arbiter of truth: “and if he refuses to listen even to the church, treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector” (Mt 18:17).
5. Christ said: “do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul; rather, be afraid of the one who can destroy both soul and body in Gehenna.” So Seeker, be not afraid of the ADD or me. Rather, fear God who can send both body and soul into hell.
Christ said: “Everyone who acknowledges me before others I will acknowledge before my heavenly Father. But whoever denies me before others, I will deny before my heavenly Father” (Mt 10:32-33). So with Peter let us say: “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God” (Mt 16:16). And with Thomas let us exclaim: “My Lord and my God!” (Jn 20:28).
Posted by SEEKER on August 11, 2009 at 7:22 pm
“So Seeker, be not afraid of the ADD or me. ”
what a rotten thought……hehehehe
I can’t think any reason why should I be afraid of you specially to ADD…
As you have said your 1 Billion… so what?
I admire you, for your ability to state some Verses,,, but, Verse should be interpreted using another verse, not supporting the verse you stated by your own catechism.. because that ABSURD….
Only Catholics believe in Catechism….
Not I nor they….
but only you Catholics…
If your really Interested about INC doctrines, so that all your wrong literature will be corrected…
try to approach an INC member and ask him to accompany you to a nearest LOCALE or CONGREGATION….
and I also will bother to have a deeper question and answer conversation to your church….
You know what if you want to seek for the truth…
you should move 1 step away from your initial belief…
In short be neutral first….
I have made this process, and I’m sure that I made the right decision to be an INC member…
My parents are born Catholic….
I’m the only INC member in the family….
Don’t be afraid to prove that your beliefs are not biblical and are just supported by own opinion….
I know your a good man, I can fell it…. but bro… Try to be NEUTRAL….
Thanks and God Bless!!!
Posted by Quirino M. Sugon Jr on August 11, 2009 at 8:23 pm
Seeker, there is no NEUTRALITY in TRUTH. Truth is or is not. Either you embrace it or you don’t. Christ is the TRUTH, for he said: “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me” (Jn 14:6) Thus, Christ can truly say: “Whoever is not with me is against me, and whoever does not gather with me scatters” (Lk 11:23). Christ told Pilate: “For this I was born and for this I came into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone who belongs to the truth listens to my voice.” And Pilate said to him, “What is Truth?” (Jn 18:37). Pilate was blind. Truth is already before him, because Truth is Christ himself.
I respect your decision to be an INC member, but I hope you did it because you searched for truth and found it and embraced it. I hope you have read the whole Bible and and have convinced yourself that what INC taught you is the Truth. But Christ said: “You search the scriptures, because you think you have eternal life through them; even they testify on my behalf. But you do not want to come to me to have life” (Jn 5:39-40)
I could not go to an INC locale or congregation. But this blog is open to INC members and ministers to ask me questions on what the Catholic Church truly teaches. For as Bishop Fulton Sheen said, “There are not a hundred people in America who hate the Catholic Church. There are millions of people who hate what they wrongly believe to be the Catholic Church — which is, of course, quite a different thing.” The same holds true in the Philippines.
May the good Lord bless you on your way and send his angel to take care of you. As the Lord said, “See, I am sending an angel before you, to guard you on the way and bring you to the place I have prepared. Be attentive to him and heed his voice. Do not rebel against him, for he will not forgive your sin. My authority resides in him” (Ex 23:20-22)
Posted by SEEKER on August 12, 2009 at 10:03 pm
We have a very old saying that says “If there’s a will there’s a way”
I don’t know the reason why can’t you go to a nearby INC locale…
maybe you have closed your heart and mind to Catholicism…
And I also respect that…
Don’t make my statement s shallow…
Because I know what I am saying…
and I know and believe that you have understood my statements…
I said that you should be neutral first before you can seek for truth…
but not to be neutral for the whole of your life….
Remember, majority of INC members are former Catholics…
And I can prove that because I’m a former catholic member…
God chooses Israel not because they are the majority but the minority…
not because they are large but because they are the smallest among nation at that time…
Deuteronomy 7:5 The LORD did not set His love upon you, nor choose you, because ye were more in number than any people–for ye were the fewest of all peoples–
Try to understand what you have said that your number counts to 1 Billion….
LUKE 13:24 Do your best to go in by the narrow door, for I say to you, A number will make the attempt to go in, but will not be able to do so.
many will attempt but only few can enter…
you can’t call 1 billion as few…..
try now to defend your thoughts about 1 billion….
remember there will be more to be in hell than to be in heaven….
Posted by Quirino M. Sugon Jr on August 13, 2009 at 9:48 am
Seeker, read carefully Deut 7:5 that you quoted. God chose Israel neither because they are many nor because they are few. Being the minority by itself is not a sufficient condition to be chosen by God. Rather, God chose Israel because of his fidelity to His promise to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. To see this, read the next lines:
“It was not because you are the largest of all nations that the LORD set his heart on you and chose you, for you are really the smallest of all nations. It was because the LORD loved you and because of his fidelity to the oath he had sworn to your fathers, that he brought you out with his strong hand from the place of slavery, and ransomed you from the hand of Pharaoh, king of Egypt. Understand, then, that the LORD, your God, is God indeed, the faithful God who keeps his merciful covenant down to the thousandth generation toward those who love him and keep his commandments, but who repays with destruction the person who hates him; he does not dally with such a one, but makes him personally pay for it.” (Deut 7:7-10)
The Catholic church also started as a tiny group–a band of twelve cowards hiding in an upper room. When the Holy Spirit descended upon them on the Feast of Pentecost, the birthday of the church (not 1914 as in INC), they went out of their room and fearlessly preached that God made Jesus both “Lord and Messiah”. On that very day itself, they converted 3,000 people (c.f. Acts 2). The Acts of the Apostles is the story of the birth and growth of the Catholic Church. Like a tiny mustard seed, the Catholic church, the Kingdom of God, grew to become a large tree where the birds of the sky, that is, all nations, dwelt in its branches (c.f. Lk 13:19). The church of 12 men became a church of 1 billion souls.
P.S. I hope Iglesia ni Cristo finally puts up its own website and publishes its Pasugo and “INC Catechism” there. In this way, I don’t have to go to an INC locale or congregation, for reading a sermon or debate removes the emotions of the speakers, and allows me to concentrate on the truth of the arguments. If you wish to know more about the Catholic Church, you can visit the website (http://www.vatican.va) or read the Catechism book which is easily bought at National Bookstore. The Church lays its teachings open for all men of goodwill. The Catholic church hides nothing, for Christ said: “No one who lights a lamp hides it away or places it (under a bushel basket), but on a lampstand so that those who enter might see the light” (Lk 11:33).
Posted by The One New Man (IGLESIA NI CRISTO) on August 13, 2009 at 4:00 pm
The One New Man (IGLESIA NI CRISTO)
I don’t know if you already heard about the one new man created in Christ Himself from two. Actually, I heard of it for the first time when I attended a Bible Exposition held in Cebu City by the Church of Christ (Filipino: Iglesia Ni Cristo). I never heard about it during my days in the Roman Catholic Church eventhough I actively performed my duties as the Sacristan Mayor of the Parish of San Agustin, Diocese of Surigao Del Sur. And this teaching is not just a teaching of the Ministers of the Church of Christ but it is the teaching of the Apostles as written on the Holy Bible.
However, in sharing this truth to you, I need to ask the Bible and let the Bible answer our questions because it is the Bible know this truth much.
To begin with, let us ask the Bible: Did the Apostle really teach that Christ created in Himself a one new man? Apostle Paul answer:
15 having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, so as to create in Himself one new man from the two, thus making peace, (Ephesians 2:15, NKJV)
According to him, a one new man was created in Christ Himself from the two. What is this ONE NEW MAN and what are the two referred to by Apostle Paul which composed the one new man? In Colossians 1:18, Apostle Paul’s answer is recorded:
18 And He is the head of the body, the church, who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in all things He may have the preeminence. (Colossians 1:18, ibid)
The answer is: The two which are created into one new man are Christ and His Church and the one new man is Christ as head and the Church as Christ’s body.
So, it is already clear that Christ really created a one new man. But what is the purpose of Christ, why he created this? Apostle Paul answered it already on the first verse that we used.
15 having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, so as to create in Himself one new man from the two, thus making peace, (Ephesians 2:15, NKJV)
According to him, it was done “to abolish the enmity, that is the law of commandment contained in ordinances and thus making peace”.
What is the law that Apostle Paul referred to in which when the one new man was created peace does exist? The answer is recorded in Deuteronomy 25:16.
16 Fathers shall not be put to death for their children, nor shall children be put to death for their fathers; a person shall be put to death for his own sin. (Deuteronomy 24:16, ibid)
The law states that anyone who committed sin will be put to death for their own sin. Is this the reason why Christ died for the sin of others? Absolutely Yes!
But wait! We already know that Christ died for the others but he never committed any sin, does it mean something contradiction?
21 For to this you were called, because Christ also suffered for us,[a] leaving us[b] an example, that you should follow His steps:
22 Who committed no sin,
Nor was deceit found in His mouth;[c] (I Peter 2:21-22, ibid)
It is true that Christ committed no sin, as stated on the verse above and that all of us (men) are sinners.
12 Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned (Romans 5:12, ibid)
And that the wages of sin is death.
23 For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. (Romans 6:23, ibid)
Since, all of us sinned, therefore each of us will be put to death because of our sin. In other words, no one will be saved on the day of judgment.
But God loved us, that is why He gave His Son to us to give us a chance to be saved on His wrath on the day of judgment.
16 For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. (John 3:16, ibid)
And to save us, Christ created the one new man, as He the head and His Church as His body. In front of God, Christ and His Church is already one new man. For this reason Christ was made to be sin.
21 For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him. (II Corinthians 5:21, ibid)
And it is now righteous for Christ to die for His Church.
25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself for her, (Ephesians 5:25, ibid)
Because His Church is already His body and that it is His obligation to be the savior of it.
23 For the husband is head of the wife, as also Christ is head of the church; and He is the Savior of the body. (Ephesians 5:23, ibid)
If Christ died for all men inside His Church, then who will die for the sins of others who are outside His Church? Christ answered it.
24 Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins; for if you do not believe that I am He, you will die in your sins. (John 8:24, ibid)
According to Him, they will die for their own sins.
Beside the truth that His Church is His body and He is the savior of it, why is it that Christ has no power to save those men outside His Church? Apostle Paul answered?
13 But those who are outside God judges. Therefore “put away from yourselves the evil person.” (I Corinthians 5:13, ibid)
According to Apostle Paul, outside God judges. And we already know from the truth revealed above what will be the judgment of God, that is, “each of them will die for their own sins”.
Therefore, it is not true that Christ died for the sin of all men on earth because the truth is Christ died for the sin of all men in His Church only. It is also not true that Christ will save men who are not part or members of His Church, because the truth is, Christ will save only His Church.
We should not forget the one new man created by Christ in Himself, and we should strive to become part of that one new man. Take note: Only the ONE NEW MAN is the one who will be saved on the day of judgment.
Posted by bro on August 13, 2009 at 5:22 pm
nice re-post from 2007. ;)
http://religiousliberal.blogspot.com/2007/11/words-we-use.html
flashback! lol
i’d rather follow-up on newer material.
Posted by Quirino M. Sugon Jr on August 14, 2009 at 9:16 am
Bro, thanks for dropping by and Godspeed. May you find something new that never grows old. Some things are new like the “grass of the field, which grows today and is thrown into the oven tomorrow” (Mt 6:30). Some things are new because to us they are new, yet they were here before us, they are here with us, and they shall continue to be here long after we are gone. Just like the mountains and the sky. But Christ said: “Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away” (Lk 21:33)
Posted by Quirino M. Sugon Jr on August 14, 2009 at 9:34 am
The One New Man, I hope you won’t mind if I shall call you Sacristan Mayor. For three reasons: (1) We shall be talking about the One New Man, and we do not wish to confuse it with you, (2) the name Sacristan Mayor adds more weight to your testimony because it conveys that you were indeed a former Sacristan Mayor in the Roman Catholic church, and (3) a person who was baptized by a Roman Catholic priest “in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” (Mt 28:19) becomes truly an adopted son of God, true heir of God’s Kingdom, and this sonship can never be removed even if, like in the story of Prodigal Son, you squandered your properties and left your Father’s house for the allurements of novel teachings of INC and have yourself rebaptized.
Posted by Quirino M. Sugon Jr on August 14, 2009 at 10:48 am
1. Sacristan Mayor, in order to understand the meaning of the “two” in “one new man from the two” in Ephesians (2:15), you don’t have to go to Colossians (1:18). You just look at the verses before what you quoted and you will see that what Paul refers by “two” are Gentiles and Jews:
“Therefore, remember that at one time you, Gentiles in the flesh, called the uncircumcision by those called the circumcision, which is done in the flesh by human hands, were at that time without Christ, alienated from the community of Israel and strangers to the covenants of promise, without hope and without God in the world. But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have become near by the blood of Christ.” (Eph 2:11-13)
Through Baptism we became neither Gentiles nor Jews but Christians:
“For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free person, there is not male and female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s descendant, heirs according to the promise.” (Gal 3:27-29)
2. Christians form the Church, the Mystical Body of Christ with Christ as its head (c.f. Col 1:18) Christ said to Paul in his conversion, “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting” (Acts 9:5). Thus, when Paul persecutes the Christians, he is persecuting Christ himself. Similarly, Christ said: “Amen, I say to you, whatever you did for one of these least brothers of mine, you did for me.’” This is the Catholic doctrine of the Church as Christ’s Mystical Body. So what INC calls as One New Man is actually Christ’s Mystical Body in the Catholic sense. What INC teaches is not new; it is an old Catholic doctrine that sadly you were not taught, even if you were serving as sacristan mayor.
3. Since the Church is the Mystical Body of Christ and Christ said that “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me” (Jn 14:6), then it follows that
“Outside the Church there is no salvation.” (Extra Ecclessiam nulla salus)
This is a Catholic doctrine which INC also misappropriates to itself. Concerning this doctrine the Catechism says:
“Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and Baptism, and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through Baptism as through a door. Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.” (Catechism of the Catholic Church Art. 846)
But unlike INC, the Church also teaches that some of those outside the Church may be saved:
“Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience–those too may achieve eternal salvation.” (Catechism of the Catholic Church Art. 847)
“God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism, but he himself is not bound by his sacraments” (Catechism Art. 1257). But this does not prevent the Church from preaching the Good News:
“Although in ways known to himself God can lead those who, through no fault of their own, are ignorant of the Gospel, to that faith without which it is impossible to please him, the Church still has the obligation and also the sacred right to evangelize all men.” (Catechism of the Catholic Church Art. 848)
Posted by SEEKER on August 14, 2009 at 7:30 pm
Ang hirap dito kay Quirino Biblia nga ang hawak di naman makaintindi……
Posted by Quirino M. Sugon Jr on August 14, 2009 at 8:23 pm
Seeker, may I know what I don’t understand? Are you referring to “It was not because you are the largest of all nations that the LORD set his heart on you and chose you, for you are really the smallest of all nations” (Deut 7:7)? We agree that God did not chose Israel because it is the largest of all nations. I think we disagree on the interpretation of the next clause: “for you are really the smallest of all nations.” This dependent clause is a statement of fact: Israel is really the smallest of all nations. This fact was placed after the independent clause “It was not because you are the largest of all nations that the LORD set his heart on you and chose you” as proof that God did not choose Israel because it is the largest.
What you want the bible to say is this: “It was not because you are the largest of all nations that the LORD set his heart on you and chose you, but because you are really the smallest.” This is an entirely different statement. If this were true, then there is no more need for the real explanation in the next line: “It was because the LORD loved you and because of his fidelity to the oath he had sworn to your fathers” (Deut 7:8).
Posted by eagle lion on August 16, 2009 at 12:46 pm
If Catholic church was really the continuation of the church established by Christ, why they change the way of baptism?
Posted by Quirino M. Sugon Jr on August 16, 2009 at 4:57 pm
Eagle Lion, below is the description of the Sacrament of Baptism from the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
“1239 The essential rite of the sacrament follows: Baptism properly speaking. It signifies and actually brings about death to sin and entry into the life of the Most Holy Trinity through configuration to the Paschal mystery of Christ. Baptism is performed in the most expressive way by triple immersion in the baptismal water. However, from ancient times it has also been able to be conferred by pouring the water three times over the candidate’s head.
“1240 In the Latin Church this triple infusion is accompanied by the minister’s words: “N., I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.” In the Eastern liturgies the catechumen turns toward the East and the priest says: “The servant of God, N., is baptized in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.” At the invocation of each person of the Most Holy Trinity, the priest immerses the candidate in the water and raises him up again.
Eagle Lion, may I know what part of the Baptismal rite you think was a Catholic innovation? Is it the baptismal formula (“I baptize you in the name of the Father….”) or is it the pouring of water over the candidate’s head three times?
Posted by SEEKER on August 16, 2009 at 6:02 pm
Eagle Lion
Just don’t mind Quirino…
Ok…
Di niya naiintindihan sinasabi niya eh…
Ang nakikita lang niya sa Catholisicism kagandahan kuno…
Hay naku….
HE’s just fooling his self….
Sige na jan….
Lamunin mo yung mga rebulto sa simbahan niyo taz… mag ipon kayo ng pampyansa sa mga Rapist and phedophile na PAri niyo……
Posted by Selboy on August 18, 2009 at 1:08 am
just want to argue this:
If the Roman Catholic Church is founded by Paul and Peter, and I learned from the Bible that Christ built his own church, in other words, Roman Catholic Church is not the church built by Christ.
Posted by Quirino M. Sugon Jr on August 18, 2009 at 2:32 pm
Selboy, Christ founded the Catholic Church on Peter the Rock:
“Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father. And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” (Mt 16:17-19)
In Greek this sounds like “You are Petros, and upon this petra.” Since Jesus spoke Aramaic, what he said was “You are Kephas, and upon this kephas” which is “You are Rock, and upon this rock.” When Jesus said this, the backdrop is Caesarea Philippi where there is a massive wall of rock that is well over 100 feet straight up and about 500 feet wide. The city of Caesarea Philippi was built on top of this enormous rock.
With this background, we can easily see that Christ founded His Church on a Rock (Peter) in a similar way as the City of Caesarea Philippi was built on top of an enormous rock. Christ is “the wise man who built his house on rock” (Mt 7:24) Christ uses parables taken from daily life as metaphors to teach the mysteries of the Kingdom of God. In the case of Peter, Jesus uses the very place of Caesarea Philippi as a ‘parable’ or metaphor to show the solidity of the Church, the Kingdom of God, that will be founded on Peter.
Posted by Selboy on August 18, 2009 at 10:14 pm
Earlier on your article you wrote that the Roman Catholic Church was founded by Peter and Paul. But now in your reply to my comment, you’re telling me that Christ founded the church and based on the verse you quoted, the church built by Christ was His own church. So, it’s clear based on your declaration that the Roman Catholic Church is not the church founded by Christ… the Roman Catholic Church is the church founded by Peter and Paul, while the true Church was founded by Christ.
Posted by Quirino M. Sugon Jr on August 19, 2009 at 11:08 am
Selboy, the Catholic Church was founded by Christ on Peter the Rock. “Catholic” simply means Universal. The local Catholic churches were founded by the apostles or their successors, the bishops. Thus, the Roman Catholic Church simply means the Catholic church based in Rome, so that the liturgy of the Roman Catholic Church follows the liturgy of that in Rome. This local Catholic Church was founded by Apostles Peter and Paul who both died there. The apostolic succession is traced from St. Peter, the first bishop of Rome.
There are also Eastern Catholic Churches and they are based on the East. For example, The Alexandrian Catholic Church is founded by St. Mark; The Antiochian Catholic Church, by St. Peter; and the Armenian Catholic Church, by Sts. Thaddeus and Bartholomew. Each of these churches are Catholic because they hold to the same doctrine as the Roman Catholic Church. They only differ in how they celebrate the liturgical rite of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.
In the West, there are Catholics who follow not the Roman (Latin) rite but the Mozarabic and the Ambrosian. The Mozarabic rite is named after the “Mozarab”, a term for the Christian population living under Islamic Spain. The Ambrosian rite is named after St. Ambrose, the Bishop of Milan.
Thus, in the Catholic Church, there is unity in doctrine but diversity in liturgical rites. As the Catechism says:
834 Particular Churches are fully catholic through their communion with one of them, the Church of Rome “which presides in charity.” “For with this church, by reason of its pre-eminence, the whole Church, that is the faithful everywhere, must necessarily be in accord.” Indeed, “from the incarnate Word’s descent to us, all Christian churches everywhere have held and hold the great Church that is here [at Rome] to be their only basis and foundation since, according to the Savior’s promise, the gates of hell have never prevailed against her.”
835 “Let us be very careful not to conceive of the universal Church as the simple sum, or . . . the more or less anomalous federation of essentially different particular churches. In the mind of the Lord the Church is universal by vocation and mission, but when she put down her roots in a variety of cultural, social, and human terrains, she takes on different external expressions and appearances in each part of the world.” The rich variety of ecclesiastical disciplines, liturgical rites, and theological and spiritual heritages proper to the local churches “unified in a common effort, shows all the more resplendently the catholicity of the undivided Church.”
Posted by Selboy on August 19, 2009 at 5:59 pm
You said, the Roman Catholic Church is the local Catholic church based in Rome. Now, if the Pope is the head of the Roman Catholic Church then who is the head of the Catholic Church?
Posted by Quirino M. Sugon Jr on August 20, 2009 at 9:54 am
Selboy, All catholic churches must be in accord with the Bishop of Rome, the Pope, who “presides in charity” over all catholic churches. Each Pope is a successor of St. Peter, the first bishop of Rome. To Peter alone was given the keys of the kingdom of heaven. Whatever he binds on earth shall be bound in heaven; whatever he looses on earth shall be loosed in heaven (c.f. Mt 16:19). This power of binding and loosing is applied whenever the Pope officially declares church dogmas (e.g. Immaculate Conception), define what is morally right and wrong (e.g. Contraception is intrinsically evil), pronounce excommunication against heretics, ratify the appointment of bishops, etc. Those who disobey the pope in these matters ceases to be catholic.
There are other passages that speak of Peter’s pastoral care over the whole Catholic Church. Jesus told Peter to feed His lambs, tend His sheep, and feed His sheep, as proof of his love for Christ (Jn 21:15-17). Peter is the “the faithful and prudent servant, whom the master has put in charge of his household to distribute to them their food at the proper time” (Mt 24:45). Jesus also told Peter: “Simon, Simon, behold Satan has demanded to sift all of you like wheat, but I have prayed that your own faith may not fail; and once you have turned back, you must strengthen your brothers.” Only to Peter was given this unfailing faith and the task of confirming the faith of his brethren. This is the basis for the Catholic doctrine of Papal Infallibility.
Peter is the Prince of the Apostles and the Vicar of Christ here on earth. Since the Church is the Body of Christ and Christ is the Head of the Church (Col 1:18), therefore Peter is the visible head of the Church and the sign of its unity.
When Peter died, who succeeded him as the head of the Church? The bishops of Rome, the Popes. Whenever the Petrine office becomes vacant, the College of Cardinals elect the new Successor of Peter. This is similar to what happened when Judas died: Matthias took his place as one of the apostles:
“Then they prayed, “You, Lord, who know the hearts of all, show which one of these two you have chosen to take the place in this apostolic ministry from which Judas turned away to go to his own place.” Then they gave lots to them, and the lot fell upon Matthias, and he was counted with the eleven apostles.” (Acts 1:24-26).”
Posted by Selboy on August 20, 2009 at 1:49 pm
You said that the Roman Catholic Church is only a local Catholic church in Rome. In other words, the Roman Catholic Church is just a small portion of the entire Catholic Church. Then how come that the head of the Roman Catholic Church, the Pope, became the head of the entire Catholic Church? Does it mean that Pope is the head of a local Catholic Church in Rome and at the same time the head of the entire Catholic Church?
Posted by Quirino M. Sugon Jr on August 20, 2009 at 5:29 pm
Selboy, yes, the Pope is both the Bishop of Rome and the head of the entire Catholic Church. How come? The explanation may be divided into ten thesis statements. Please tell me which you agree and which you don’t.
1. Peter is the head of the apostles.
2. Peter has an unfailing faith and his task is to confirm the faith of his brethren.
3. Peter has the power of binding and loosing.
4. The bishops are the successors of the apostles.
5. The bishops are the head of the local Catholic churches.
5. The Pope is the Bishop of Rome.
6. Rome is a local Catholic Church.
7. Peter is the first Bishop of Rome.
8. The Pope is the Successor of Peter as Bishop of Rome.
9. The Pope is the head of the bishops.
10. The Pope is the head of universal Catholic Church.
Posted by Catholic Defender on August 20, 2009 at 6:04 pm
Brother Quirino, I can sense in you the intelligence of a Jesuit. Thanks for the prudence in explaining the Catholic Faith to non-Catholics and ex-Catholcs.
God bless you and your loved ones.
Thanks for defending Christ and his Church.
Posted by Quirino M. Sugon Jr on August 20, 2009 at 7:09 pm
Thanks, Catholic Defender, but I am not a Jesuit. I am only a hobbit who was taught by the Jesuits. I thank God that many non-Catholics visit this blog to ask me questions on what the Catholic church really teaches. Most of their questions are not new. They had been asked before, debated, and answered for a time in the 2000-year history of the Catholic Church. Our task as apologists is simply to find the Church’s answer to these questions and explain them anew. The Catechism is an invaluable reference. You can Google the rest. Best wishes.
Posted by SEEKER on August 20, 2009 at 11:37 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jnh7aSpfOC4
watch
Posted by Papal Sin on August 22, 2009 at 2:15 pm
“ANG ASO HINDI TATAHOL KUNG KILALA NIYA YUNG TAO”
si QUIRINO tahol ng tahol about INc siguro ASO siya ano sa palagay niyo?
Posted by Quirino M. Sugon Jr on August 22, 2009 at 4:00 pm
Papal Sin, thank you for calling me a dog, for even the dog eat the scraps that fall from the table of their masters (Mt 15:27). In Latin, dog is Canis. Canis familiaris is the scientific name of domestic dog. Domine Canes is “dogs of the Lord”, which is the moniker of the Dominicans, the Order of Preachers whose preaching destroyed the Albigensian religion in the 14th century. Like the INC the Albigensians believe that Jesus is just a mere creature and not God. I am a Dominican, because I was taught by the Dominican sisters in elementary. So I really appreciate that you call me a dog for that is who I am: a dog of the Lord. But fear not. A dog that barks don’t bite. A man who speaks don’t fight.
Posted by Rapist Pope on August 23, 2009 at 9:32 pm
hahahhahaha….
relax… from now on… your “quirino the great dog”…. hehehehhehehe
aw aw aw……
kagatin mo yung mga rebulto niyo….
me aso din naman sa simbahan… I dont know the name… but me nakita ako once… ung rebulto me kasamang aso…
imagine pati yun hinahaplos ng mga Katoliko…..
eiw……
rotten faith…
Qurino the dog
Posted by manalo faggot on August 24, 2009 at 1:30 pm
Iglesia ni Manalo, iglesia ng mga mangmang, mga magnanakaw, mga hunghang at mga kampon ni Satanas, walang magawa sa buhay kundi nakawin ang pera ng mga kaanib, sumakay na lang kayo sa mga spaceship niyong mga tambakan, este, sambahan nang masunog na kayo lahat ng araw. Iglesia ni Manalong may maharot na kangkarot, iglesia ng mga sinungaling at mga tanga, iglesiang nagpapanggap na tunay pero puro kasinungalinga’t katarantaduhan lang pala!
Posted by Quirino M. Sugon Jr on August 24, 2009 at 5:18 pm
My friend, I allow the members of INC to call me names, for three reasons:
(1) it reveals that INC members cannot anymore focus on arguments that they resort to name-calling. This means that INC is not a reasonable religion, but a cult. A true religion is reasonable because truth can be obtained by reason.
(2) Christ said: “A good tree does not bear rotten fruit, nor does a rotten tree bear good fruit. For every tree is known by its own fruit. For people do not pick figs from thorn bushes, nor do they gather grapes from brambles. A good person out of the store of goodness in his heart produces good, but an evil person out of a store of evil produces evil; for from the fullness of the heart the mouth speaks”. (Lk 6:43-45)
(3) St. Peter said: “Always be ready to give an explanation to anyone who asks you for a reason for your hope, but do it with gentleness and reverence, keeping your conscience clear, so that, when you are maligned, those who defame your good conduct in Christ may themselves be put to shame” (1 Peter 3:15-16)
Thank you.
Posted by United Caatholic & ADD on August 24, 2009 at 7:03 pm
hahahahah…
ngsama ang ADD taz Catholic…
heheheh nakakaawa sila… ngkakampihan ang mga galit na galit na galiot na galit sa INC…..
keep up the good work….
at least yung isang barangay ng ADD nadagdag sa ilang dosenang Dios ng Catholic……
hahahahahaha….
Mga Looser…
Manalo Faggot,
halatadong ADD ka….. naamoy ang budhi mo pati sa monitor ng PC ko….
amoy INSECURE….
Quirino,
wag kang magmalinis……
para kang santo kung tumahol….
Banal na aso, Santong kabayo… natatawa ako e e e eli Soriano…. kabayo…. wahahahahahah
Posted by Quirino M. Sugon Jr on August 25, 2009 at 6:40 am
I have now shown that INC members are indeed not reasonable. Now, I shall moderate the comments. Comments which do not make a theological argument will be deleted. Thank you.
Posted by SEEKER on August 25, 2009 at 9:39 pm
To Brother Quirino….
Please be awre and inform that not all Blogger who defend INC is an INC member….
Some of those are just trying to give a bad impression about INC…
They used foul words, and degrade others by saying that they are INC member…
Please don’t make any hasty generalization…
that obe who defend INC is already an iNC member…
that’s the tactic of others who want to make INC shameless whwn it comes to blogging…
And also some are just changing their name but it only constitutes a single person…..
We INC member are taught to be accountable and liable in our statements…
And I am shocked when my name was used…..
Thanks Brother Quirino and MAbuhay…..
Posted by SEEKER on August 25, 2009 at 9:40 pm
HINDI PO SILA IGLESIA NI CRISTO BROTHER>>>
Posted by Quirino M. Sugon Jr on August 26, 2009 at 9:33 am
Thank you, Seeker. I am glad you wish to live up to your name as member of Iglesia ni Cristo. As Jesus said to Nathaniel: “Here is a true Israelite. There is no duplicity in him.” (Jn 1:47)
Posted by Catholic Defender on August 26, 2009 at 2:15 pm
Hello Seeker,
I hope what you are saying is right. But do you know CONRAD J. OBLIGACION? He’s an full fledge INC who stole names (including mine), call me by different names and he’s very proud INC member. See how he argues in http://www.pinoyexchange.com.
Give me names of your Ministers who have done the “Mother Teresa” works of charity? Or anyone from INC tried to reach out to Catholics? If you are a bonafide INC then you are one of a kind and we have a lot of things to agree than to disagree.
Posted by SEEKER on August 26, 2009 at 7:07 pm
Quirino,
Thanks, for believing…. And Can I ask something for you….
could we stop branding any Church in negative form…..?
If we want to know the answers for all your questions… the best way I think is to bother your self to ask a minister…. because honestly, the skill of the INC ministers are different as that of INC members…
And one thing more… don’t moderate the messages who attacked you personally and telling their selves as an INC member, which I know and you know that they are not….. they are just a cult who try to pull down INC. Hayaan mo lang sila diyan, diyan sila masaya eh…..
minumura nila yung mga ka blog nila din mgpapakilala silang INC which is not true naman…..
To Catholic Defender….
Once again it is easy to use such name… so wag sana tayong maniwala na kapag me nagdedefend sa INC eh INC na un…
Nagmumukha silang Ignorante sa pagsagot, syempre ngpakilala silang INC eh, which is hindi naman di ba…
I know that you know how ADD attacks INC it’s been decades, na pagmumura at paninira sa INC… pero look at them now… me naaabot ba sila?
And one thing more can you please elaborate your message in the 2nd paragraph of your message>?
di ko kc maxaong na gets
Thanks Quirino ang Catholic Defender
Mabuhay……..
Posted by Quirino M. Sugon Jr on August 26, 2009 at 7:50 pm
Thanks, Seeker. But Christ commands us to “make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you” (Mt 28:19-20). Convert, baptize, teach. We respect the members and ministers of INC as fellow human beings, but because we are also concerned about their eternal salvation, we have to point out errors in INC’s teachings. Truth is one. The Christ of Catholics is different from that of INC. For Catholics, Christ is true God and true man. For INC, Christ is only a mere man. If the eternal salvation of the soul depends on the belief on the divinity of Christ, then it is my Christian duty to proclaim the “one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds (æons), Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father; By whom all things were made [both in heaven and on earth]” (Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed 381 AD)
I don’t attack persons but wrong deas. It is possible to defend the truths with clear arguments without resorting to name calling. I shall now formally open my blog to questions from former Catholics of INC who wants to know what the Catholic Church really teaches. I shall do this in a new post. I found some texts of the Pasugo online. I shall read through them and comment on the arguments, though this will not be frequent since I have other priorities in this blog: Philippine Jesuits and the Traditional Latin Mass. I shall post my critique. If the ministers of INC will also comment on my posts, I will be happy. All of these done in a civil way.
Take care.
Posted by “One New Man” of Iglesia ni Cristo (INC) and the “Mystical Body of Christ” of the Catholic Church « Monk’s Hobbit on August 27, 2009 at 9:37 am
[...] was not spared. Someone posted it as a comment (dated 13 Aug 2009) to my post entitled, “Is Iglesia ni Cristo the Church of Christ?” The essay starts with the following paragraph: I don’t know if you already heard about [...]
Posted by Catholic Defender on August 27, 2009 at 3:39 pm
CONRAD J. OBLICAGION is a true bonafide Iglesia ni Cristo member which he denied. He stole my name, created a bogus blog bearing my Christian name to humiliate me attacking my personality rather than the issues I addressed.
Now tell me SEEKER, who is and who is not!
Posted by SEEKER on August 27, 2009 at 8:18 pm
I DONT KNOW about that Catholic Defender…
Ok Quirino, you can continue your blog against the teachings of INC , primarily it’s your freedom….
Pero wag kang aasa na dahil lamang sa blog na ito ma iimpluwensyahan mo ang sinumang INC member na mgbabasa nito…
For A catholic, YES, they will definitely believe you..
For non-catholic and non-INC they MIGHT believe you….
But, for INC members,,,, MALABO bro….
We iNC members are STRONGLY believe and follow our faith to God….
Okay? Just keep trying… malay niyo me maakit kayo kahit papaano, pero I’m sure ngayon pa lang walang maniniwala kung ano man ang sasabihin niyo against INC….
Because we know in our selves that those criticisms against INC are not TRUE….
Thanks and Mabuhay…
Posted by Reply to Iglesia ni Cristo: Prohibiting priests to marry and abstinence from meats are doctrines of devils? « Monk’s Hobbit on September 1, 2009 at 6:33 pm
[...] did not give the reason why, but a fellow INC member who commented on my blog post, “Is Iglesia ni Cristo the Church of Christ?” said that the proof is in the First Book of Timothy: Now the Spirit explicitly says that in [...]
Posted by INCFOREVER on September 21, 2009 at 8:18 pm
I find this post rather hilarious. Could it be that you are way too insecure about you’re own religion that’s why you had to post this? Or possibly you overly obsess about us and our religion that you’re in denial that you actually want to become an Iglesia yourself? And why are you so against our religion anyway? If you were so against Iglesia then why do you care so much? There is that saying “the more you hate, more you love”. I believe that saying applies to you. Because if you didn’t care and obsess about our religion then you wouldn’t put all that time and effort into writing this blog. You could’ve written about… uhh perhaps…. your religion?
Think about it ;) and I wouldn’t be surprised to see you joining our church one day. See you soon ;)
Posted by INCFOREVER on September 21, 2009 at 8:27 pm
Iglesia Ni Cristo.
I love Iglesia Ni Cristo, the true church.
Come to our church.
So will I see you this mid-week worship service?
No reply mean….. YES! Alright see you then. :D
Posted by Quirino M. Sugon Jr on September 22, 2009 at 4:39 pm
INCFOREVER, may I know the scriptural basis of INC for holding your worship services in midweek or Sunday and not in Saturday (Sabbath)?
Posted by displ@y on September 23, 2009 at 7:06 pm
Truth is a lot has been misinterpreted by INC. But it is not their fault because sometimes, we Filipinos, even being the largest Catholic country in the Philippines, are not well “taught” about our own faith. For example some Filipinos, the church must admit, are really worshiping images even though it is not the teaching of the Church, in fact, it is against its teaching. The images are just there for veneration and for a reminder.
But what INC should realize is that it should not take the bible as it is. INC should consider the historical and cultural background of the Scriptures for they were made for very specific audiences of their time and place. There are some things which we cannot fully understand, which will cause us to misinterpret things, if we do not understand the situation of the original audience. We should remember that Scriptures are on one level the Word of God and is in fact “God-breathed” but it is also on the other hand written by a human writing for a specific audience. The bible did not fall down from the heavens. The bible was written by humans.
One example of how easily the bible can be misinterpreted when we do not put ourselves in the situation of the authorial audience is Arianism. When the original Christians tried to communicate their faith for the Greek, the Greek accepted the faith but misinterpreted it. It is because Greek philosophy was unable to cope and understand the basics and fundamentals of Christianity. Greek philosophy claims that Jesus is logos, (“reason” in Greek but “word” in Hebrew. I suggest that you further research what the logos meant for the Greeks in order to fully understand the next parts which I would be discussing.) and that Jesus is made of spiritus, the same “divine stuff” which God is made. Greek philosophy says that the Father is one and the Son is another, both are divine but the Father is “more divine”. Arius, “father of Arianism” so to speak, expanded this idea and claimed that if the Son is not fully divine then it is not divine at all. The logos was simply God’s first creature. This claim of Arius, to be honest, is actually very sharp. This is because in Greek philosophy, God is something who is incapable of changing, on the other hand, Jesus moved in the realm of this changeable and imperfect world. God is the total opposite of humans in Greek philosophy. God was immutable, perfect and divine while humans are far from perfect and divine. And in here lies the problem. Greek philosophy was unable to grasp a God who was supposed to be the total opposite of humans, (at least according to their philosophy) who became a human and taught us how to be a human. But the foundation of Christianity is about a God who so loved us that he became human and died for us, a very different view from what Greek philosophy see in Christianity.
I think INC should learn from this mistake. Because INC gets most of it teaching in SCRIPTURE ALONE which is just plain stupidity in my opinion.
(Please feel free if you see any mistake in my post)
Posted by Quirino M. Sugon Jr on September 24, 2009 at 10:08 am
A few [Arians], being shrewder–the two Eusebiuses among them–decided that with an insignificant alteration of words, their doctrines could survive. For the word homoousios, which means ‘of the same substance,’ they substituted homoiousios, meaning ‘of similar substance.’ There was only an iota of difference between these two words, but this difference, so slight in appearance, is a fundamental one, and the magnitude of the matter at stake should not be mistaken. Between homoousios and homoiousios there was an abyss: on one hand identification with God, on the other mere resemblance, which simply means nondissimilarity. The subtle genius of the Greeks grasped this difference perfectly, and the precise historic mission of the Eastern Orthodox Fathers was to be the task of maintaining this identification, despite all seductions, temptations and quibbling. This piece of orthographical cunning was to have very serious consequences.
… The text which the council adopted, in order to establish Catholic dogma in the face of attacks by Arius and his supporters, has remained fundamental in the Church until our own day. A new ‘rule of faith’ was laid down. It did not differ substantially from that followed by the first Christians–the ancient ‘Apostles Creed’–but it was more explicit, drafted in such a way that no error could creep into it. This text is the Nicene Creed… As issued by the Council of Nicaea, this Creed is as follows (words in italics and brackets are those which were added later in the interest of clarity):
We believe in one God, The Father almight,y Maker (of heaven and earth), and of all things visible and invisible; And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, that is to say, of the essence of the Father, God of God, Light of Light, true God of true God; Begotten not made; consubstantial with the Father, by whom all things were made, Who, for us men, and for our salvation, came down (from Heaven), and was incarnate (by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary); and was made man; (He was cruicified also for us), suffered (under Pontius Pilate, and was buried). The third day he rose again (according to the Scriptures); and ascended into heaven (amd sitteth at the right hand of the Father): and he shall come (again with glory) to judge both the living and the dead (of whose kingdom there shall be no end). And I believe in the Holy Ghost…
The value of the fourteenth century theologians lies in the fact that they understood this and that, in order to resist their enemies, they perseveringly sought and found formulae explicit enough to safeguard the divinity of Christ, which is the whole essence of Christianity. Each little turn of phrase was aimed at removing a heretical threat. Each word, too, was charged with meaing. Reading the, one realizes how violent and how moving had been the debate on the ‘consubstantial,’–and, for all the precision that men had attempted to give these formulae, how wide open the field still remained to dangerous interpretations.
Source: Henri Daniel-Rops, “The Church of Apostles and Martyrs”, vol. II (Image books, New York, 1962), pp. 208-212.
Posted by Catholic Defender on September 24, 2009 at 7:35 pm
Along the line while Mr. Quirino and members of the cult of Manalo were exchanging words, have you noticed the difference? One is explaining through the Bible and reason and one is attacking Mr. Quirino by calling him by names without addressing the issue at hand.
This is typically INC and I can attest to this style. Nowhere in any place on earth have I seen a member of the cult with reasonable explanations.
I am afraid the hostile SEEKER and the “all-of-a-sudden” meek SEEKER are one and the same. “United Caatholic & ADD” and “Papal Sin” and “Rapist Priest” is just one person hiding his real identity for fear of attacking him too.
Any INC member with courage come out and give us your personal link where we can address you properly by name?
I guess NONE will!
Posted by laycarmelite on September 25, 2009 at 11:37 am
Your observation is very very true. They don’t address the issue at hand. Either the attack the person by ad hominem fallacy or by polemics (namimilosopo). Proven yan sa isang INC e-group discussion where I am a participant. Ganyan sila kapag hindi nila kayang ma-depensahan ang kanilang paniniwala. Some of the INCs I have known in the discussion group are very rude and one INC called my office phone and bad mouthed our office receptionist because in one of my email exchanges I have caught them in a position that they cannot defend their doctrines.
Posted by Catholic Defender on October 4, 2009 at 7:02 pm
They’re prone to violence when cornered. In e-forums, they all hide their real identities but feasts on anyone they knew of. They are all cowards. In fact not even the INC central can expose their OFFICIAL TEACHINGS in the internet! They are all hiding everything– from their official teachings, from their real number of affiliates, from their monthly collections, etc.
Posted by Agnostic in Search for Truth on November 14, 2009 at 11:13 am
Few things I’ve noticed between Mr. Quirino and the Defenders of Iglesia ni Cristo. One, the Defenders of Iglesia ni Cristo tries to avoid directly answering the arguments posted by Mr. Quirino, in Psychiatry we call it Tangentiality. They keep on presenting new arguments a bit related to the original one but they never hit the point. They raise new questions and new topics without presenting their evidence that would debunk Mr. Quirino’s propositions. Second, I’ve been reading the commentaries posted here by those who are against Mr. Quirino and I have this feeling that he’s talking to or debating with childish people who cannot present a strong defense for their argument, rather they opted to commit ad hominim fallacies, argumentum ad ignorantum, and fallacy of false cause to cover up their shallow-mindedness…It seems to me that these people does not know the rules being followed during debates. About the commentary made by “the Seeker”, “Ang hirap dito kay Quirino Biblia nga ang hawak di naman makaintindi……” – as far as I know, it’s “the Seeker” who does not understand the Bible he’s using…because reading Mr. Quirino’s reply, I can say there is dept and coherence in his statements…may I ask if Mr. Quirino has degree in Philosophy?
I’m an agnostic and a graduate from UP Diliman currently taking up Medicine in UERM, but now in I am in search for the “Truth”. I enjoy joining debates and reading blog such as this…I’ve been talking to many INC members before and I’ve meet some of their pastors…and what can I say is….the things that you’ll hear when you talk to them face to face is much the same as what you can read from the replies by INC members to Mr. Quirino’s blog…it’s all but shallow propositions…in fact if you’ll close your eyes while listening to them, you’ll mistake them with a 3 year old kid.
Posted by Quirino M. Sugon Jr on November 14, 2009 at 3:24 pm
Agnostic in Search for Truth,
Thank you. My degree is in physics and not in philosophy. But since physics is a branch of philosophy, you can say that I have a degree in philosophy. I only studied 16 units of philosophy as an undergraduate at Ateneo de Manila. Our philosophy courses may be different than that of UP Diliman, e.g. we don’t have Logic as a course. But we get to read and discuss some selections of Plato, Aristotle, Kant, Levinas, Aquinas, Augustine, etc.
If I am not mistaken, an agnostic does not deny the existence of God; he only says that God is not knowable. This is in a sense true, because of the infinite distance between God and his creatures. But the Good News is this: since it is difficult for us to know who God is by our own powers, God took the initiative to reveal himself by making a covenant with men starting with Abraham. He revealed his name to Moses as “I am who am”. He revealed his laws in the Ten Commandments. He sends prophets to remind Israel of what He said and His promise of a Redeemer. Since Man cannot redeem himself from sin by his own powers, God took again the initiative and became man like us except sin. The Son of God became the Son of Man, so that man may share in the divine life. Jesus, the Son of God, revealed the Father (c.f. Jn 14:9). And before Jesus ascended into Heaven, he at last revealed the Holy Trinity” (c.f. Mt 28:19-20).
Since God has revealed Himself, therefore God is knowable.
Quirino