Kinopya ko dito ang post ni Kanickz.
Sayang kung hindi mababasa.
--------------------------------------------
Ayon sa Filipios 2: 6-7
"Na siya, bagamat NASA ANYONG DIOS, ay hindi niya inaring isang bagay na nararapat panangnan ang PAGKAPANTAY NIYA SA DIOS,
Kundi bagkus hinubad niya ito, at NAG-ANYONG ALIPIN, na NAKITULAD SA MGA TAO."
1. NASA ANYONG DIOS
Ano ang kahulugan ng salitang “nasa anyong Dios” sa pahayag na ito ni apostol Pablo? Nangangahulugan ba itong si Cristo ay tunay na Dios ayon sa kaniya?
Ayon kay apostol din kay apostol Pablo, si Cristo ay tao sa likas na kalagayan.
"Sapagkat may isang Dios at may isang tagapamagitan sa Dios at sa mga tao, ang taong si Cristo Jesus." (I Timoteo 2: 5)
Ang tunay na likas na kalagayan ng Dios ay Espiritu at walang anyo. Ayon mismo kay Cristo:
"Ang Dios ay Espiritu..." (Juan 4: 24), "...ang Espiritu’y walang laman at buto." (Lukas 24: 36)
"Sapagkat wala kayong nakitang anomang anyo ng araw nang magsalita ang Panginoon sa inyo." (Deut. 4: 14-16)
Si Cristo ay nasa anyong Dios sapagkat ayon din kay apostol Pablo, si Cristo ay larawan ng Dios.
"Upang sa kanila’y huwag sumilang ang kaliwanagan ng evanghelio ng kaluwalhatian ni Cristo, na siyang larawan ng Dios." (II Corinto 4: 4)
Sa salitang Griego, ang salitang “larawan” at “anyo” ay magkasingkahulugan.
“Anyo” (Tagalog)- “Form” (English)- “Morphe” (Greek)
“Larawan” (Tagalog) - “Image” (English)- “Eikon” (Greek)
Kung ang ating Panginoong Jesucristo ay larawan ng Dios, ito’y nagpapatunay lamang sa siya nga ay tunay na tao sapagkat, ang mga unang tao din ay nilikha na kalarawan ng Dios.
"At nilalang ng Dios ang tao ayon sa kaniyang sariling larawan, ayon sa larawan ng Dios siya nilalang; nilalang niya sila na lalake at babae." (Genesis 1: 26-27)
Ang tao ay nilalang na kalarawan ng Dios hindi sa literal na kahulugan kundi sa larawan ng kaniyang "KABANALAN".
"At kayo’y mangagbago sa Espiritu ng inyong pagiisip,
At kayo’y mangagbihis ng bagong pagkatao, na ayon sa Dios ay nilalang sa katuwiran at sa kabanalan ng katotohanan." (Efeso 4: 23-24)
At sa larawan ng "PAG-IBIG".
"Ayon sa pagkapili niya sa atin sa kaniya bago pa itinatag ang sanglibutan, upang tayo’y maging mga banal at walang dungis sa harapan niya sa pagibig.
Na tayo’y itinalaga niya nang una pa sa pagkukupkop na tulad sa mga anak sa pamamagitan ni Jesucristo sa ganang kaniya." (Efeso 1: 4-5)
Sapagkat ang Dios ay banal kaya ang tao’y pinapaging banal din ng Dios.
"Ngunit yamang banal ang sa inyo’y tumawag, ay mangagpakabanal naman kayo sa lahat ng paraan ng pamumuhay;
Sapagkat nasusulat, kayo’y magpakabanal; sapagkat ako’y banal."
(I Pedro 1: 15-16)
Subalit ang tao ay hindi nakatugon sa pagiging kalarawan ng Dios sa kabanalan dahil sa pagkakasala.
"Sapagkat ang lahat ay nangagkasala nga, at hindi nangakaabot sa kaluwalhatian ng Dios." (Roma 3:23)
"at sa ganito’y ang kamatayan ay naranasan ng lahat ng mga tao, sapagkat ang lahat ay nangagkasala." (Roma 5:12)
Sa lahat ng mga tao, si cristo lamang ang tanging nakatugon sa pagiging larawan ng Dios sapagkat siya’y hindi nagkasala (I Pedro 2:22).
2. PAGKAPANTAY NIYA SA DIOS
Tanging si Cristo lamang ang nakapantay sa Dios sa larawan ng kabanalan.
"Sapagkat nararapat sa atin ang gayong dakilang saserdoteng banal, walang sala, walang dungis," (Hebreo 7: 26)
"Na siya’y hindi nagkasala, o kinasumpungan man ng daya ang kaniyang bibig." (I Pedro 2: 22)
Sapagkat Ang Dios ay banal:
"Sapagkat nasusulat, kayo’y mangagpakabanal; sapagkat ako’y banal."
(I Pedro 1: 16)
Ang pagkapantay ni Cristo sa Dios ay sa kabanalan at hindi sa pagiging kalagayang Dios sapagkat ang tunay na Dios ay walang kapantay at walang kagaya.
"Kanino ninyo ako itutulad, at ipaparis at iwawangis ako upang kami ay magkagaya?" (Isaias 40: 25)
"Kanino nga ninyo itututad ang Dios? O anong wangis ang iwawangis ninyo sa kaniya?" (Isaias 40: 18)
"…sapagkat ako’y Dios at walang gaya ko." (Isaias 46: 9)
Kaya ang mga taong lingkod ng Dios ay itinalaga din noong una pa upang maging kalarawan ni Cristo sa kabanalan.
"Sapagkat yaong mga una pa’y kaniyang nakilala, ay itinalaga naman niya na maging katulad ng larawan ng kaniyang Anak, upang siya’y maging panganay sa maraming magkakapatid." (Roma 8: 29)
"At dahil sa kanila’y pinabanal ko ang aking sarili, upang sila naman ay magpakabanal sa katotohanan." (Gawa 17: 19)
3. NAG-ANYONG ALIPIN NA NAKITULAD SA MGA TAO
Bakit sinabi ni apostol Pablo sa si Cristo ay nakitulad sa tao kung siya rin ay totoong tao na sa kalagayan? Ano ba ang tinularan ni Cristo sa tao?
Si Cristo ay ginawang Panginoon ng Dios upang sundin ng lahat ng mga tao.
"Pakatalastasin nga ng buong angkan ni Israel, na ginawa ng Dios na Panginoon at Cristo itong si Jesus na inyong ipinako sa krus."
(Gawa 2: 36)
Ang ibig sabihin ng Panginoon ay sinusunod:
"At bakit tinatawag ninyo ako, Panginoon, Panginoon, at di ninyo ginagawa ang mga bagay na aking sinasabi?" (Lukas 6: 46)
Subalit sa halip na Panginoon, si Cristo ay nagpakababa sa kaniyang sarili sa pagsunod sa Dios.
"At palibhasa’y nasumpungan sa anyong tao, siya’y nagpakababa sa kaniyang sarili, na nagmasunurin sa Dios hanggang sa kamatayan, oo, sa kamatayan sa krus." (Filipos 2: 8)
"Gayon din naman ang Anak ng tao ay hindi naparito upang paglingkuran, kundi upang maglingkod, at ibigay ang kaniyang buhay na pangtubos sa marami." (Mateo 20: 28)
Siya ay nakitulad sa tao sa pagsunod sa Dios at hindi sa kalagayan sapagkat ang pagsunod sa Dios ay katungkulan ng lahat ng tao.
"Ito ang wakas ng bagay; lahat ay narinig: ikaw ay matakot sa Dios, at sundin mo ang kaniyang mga utos; sapagkat ito ang buong katungkulan ng tao." (Eclesiastes 12: 13)
Sa kabila ng kaniyang pagiging banal, siya ay nakitulad sa tao sapagkat siya’y itinuring ng Dios na makasalanan upang tubusin ang kasalanan ng lahat ng mga tao.
"… sa pagsugo ng Dios sa kaniyang sariling Anak na nag-anyong lamang salarin at dahil sa kasalanan, ay hinatulan ng Dios sa laman ang kasalanan." (Roma 8: 3)
"Yaong hindi nakakilala ng kasalanan ay kaniyang inaring may sala dahil sa atin: upang tayo’y maging sa kaniya’y katuwiran ng Dios."
(II Corinto 5: 21)
Sapagkat ang lahat ng tao ay nagkasala:
"Sapagkat ang lahat ay nangagkasala nga, at hindi nakaabot sa kaluwalhatian ng Dios." (Roma 3: 23)
Katulad din ng unang lingkod ng Dios na si Job, siya ay nakitulad sa tao hindi sa kalagayan kundi sa kaniyang pagiging matatag sa pagsunod.
"Nang magkagayon, ang Panginoon ay nagsalita kay Job mula sa bagyo: Suhayan mo ang sarili mo na tulad ng isang tao, tatanungin kita at tugunin mo ako."(Job 40:6-7, NPV)
Ang katumbas lamang sa ibang pangungusap "magpakatatag ka at tatanungin kita…"
Konklusiyon:
1.Ang paksa ng pahayag ni apostol Pablo ay hindi ang tungkol sa pagiging Dios ni Cristo kundi ang tungkol sa kaniyang pagpakababa sa pagsunod sa Dios na dapat sundin ng lahat ng mga Cristiano, Filipos 2: 5-12.
2.Ang salitang “anyong Dios” ay hindi tumutukoy sa literal na kahulugan sapagkat ang tunay na Dios ay espiritu at walang pisikal na larawan (Juan 4:24).
3.Ang tinularan ni Cristo sa tao ay ang pagiging alipin sa pagsunod sa Dios, sa kabila ng kaniyang pagiging Panginoon at pagiging banal.
4.Ang pagkapantay ni Cristo sa Dios ay hindi sa kalagayan kundi ang kanyang pagiging kalarawan sa kabanalan sapagkat siya ay hindi nagkasala.
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Nag hahanap pa siguro ng maisasagot si kulangot.Kapatid saan kaya kukuha ng maisagot si kulangot?Sino kaya ang kakampi sa kanya na apostol eh Si apostol pablo ay siguradong di kakampi sa kanya sapagkat nagpahayag na si apostol pablo na taong taga pamagitan sa tao at sa Diyos ang ating panginoong Jesus.d ba kapatid?
kaya si kulangot kapatid nakalbo na...kasi sa kakakamot ng ulo niya kung paano niya sasaguton ang mga sagot nating ito sa binigay niyang talata sa atin.tsk...tsk...tsk...
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
(Login michael_a2007)
sa mga verse na ipinakita mo...
No score for this post April 2 2008, 7:13 PM
...
wala NI ISA na nagsasabing "CHRIST IS NOT GOD"...yan ang patunayan nyo kahit anong translation and version and language of the Bible...
simple lang naman, "ANYONG DIYOS"...
may anyo o wala?, meron kaya nga anyong Diyos eh...
eh ano ang anyo niya?, natural DIYOS kaya nga sinabing anyong DIyos eh...
isa pa sabi mo, ANYONG DIYOS ay hindi literal, tapos baka kumambyo ka sa sagot sa tanong na ito...
sabi mo NAG-ANYONG ALIPIN, so alipin ba?, oo naman dahil una di naman sila mayaman at ipinanganak si Cristo sa sabsaban o manger...
LIKENESS OF MEN - tao ba?, oo naman dahil NAGKATAWANG TAO NGA (John 1:14)...
hehe tila yata ang "ANYONG DIYOS" lang ang hindi literal pero ang iba literal na, lol don't be BIAS tsong...
talagang MATIGAS ang puso ninyo, dahil sa mga mali ninyong aral... You're the one who's biased. Your beliefs are actually based only on your personal interpretations and conclusions on what is written in the Bible.
Until now you haven't presented to us a single verse that the Lord Jesus Christ Himself teached that He is also a true God.
“Let us quote this verse and see if it allows the interpretation that Christ is here called God:
IN the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.? (John 1:1,NKJV)
Those who believe that Christ is God assume that Christ is the “Word" mentioned in this verse. However, it is quite plain that the name “Christ" is not even mentioned in this verse. Neither does the verse say that Christ preexisted in the beginning as God. The verse simply states that “IN the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."
But isn’t it true that Christ is the fulfillment of the “Word" mentioned in John 1:1? He is indeed the fullfilment of the “Word" in that verse. Hence, the “Word" was about Christ. But take note that this is not the same as saying that the “Word" was Christ Himself who existed in the beginning as an independent being.
Then why did the verse say that “IN the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God"? In I Peter 1:20, this is written:
Who was foreknown indeed before the foundation of the world (Revised Version)
The “Word" which was about Christ is said to be “in the beginning" and “with God" because Christ was in the mind of God before the creation of the world. He was not yet a being then but only a thought in the mind of God. The “Word" in John 1:1 was not a being existing on its own, independent of God, but was simply a thought or a word in the mind of God. Thus, the verse states that “the Word was with God", being in the mind of God.
Why is it wrong to interpret the “Word" in John 1:1 as Christ, pre-existing in the beginning as God? The verse clearly states that "“the Word was with God." So if, aside from God, the "“Word" were another God, there would be two Gods: one God with another God. One cannot accept the interpretation without doing violence to the biblical teaching on the absolute oneness of God.
Did the “Word" remain in the mind of God? Did it remain a thought or a plan in God’s mind? In Romans 1:2-3, this is written:
Which He promised before His prophets in the Holy Scriptures, concerning His Son Jesus Christ our Lord, who was born on the seed of David according to the flesh.? (NKJV)
Apostle Paul states here that Christ is the Son of God whom He had promised through His prophets in the Holy Scriptures. Clearly, then, the “Word" concerning Christ did not remain in the mind of God, because eventually He expressed that thought in the promise he made through His prophets.
Since when did God make a promise concerning Christ? In Genesis 3:14-15 this is stated:
So the Lord God said to the serpent: ‘Because you have done this, You are cursed more that all cattle, And more that every beast of the field;?And I will put enmity between you and the woman, And between your seed and her Seed; He shall bruise your head, And you shall bruise His heel. (ibid.)
This pronouncement which God made in the Garden of Eden right after the fall of man is about Christ. He is being referred to as the Seed of the woman. Another pronouncement God made concerning Christ is written in Genesis 17:7, thus:
And I will establish covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee. (King James Version)
This was addressed to Abraham with whom God made an everlasting cevenant. The covenant was not to be with Abraham alone but also with his seed. Who is the seed of Abraham? Apostle Paul explains in Galatians 3:16:
Now that Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ. (ibid.)
Christ is the Seed of Abraham. When God made an everlasting covenant with Abraham, He said, “I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed.nbsp; And that was an everlasting covenant that God would be God unto Abraham and to his Seed. Take note that the covenant stipulates that Abraham and his Seed shall deify God; God shall be God unto them, both to Abraham and his Seed, who is Jesus Christ. Far from being a God, Christ is someone who was destined to recognize the true God. As early as the time that the good news about Jesus Christ was being foretold, He was already distinguished from God.
So there was no pre-existent Christ. There was no Christ prior to the fulfillment of the plan of God concerning Him. What was there with God in the beginning was the word or the thought or the plan concerning Christ. Then why is it stated in John 1:1 that the “Word" was God? It is because the “Word" or plan concerning Christ comes from God. Since the “Word" is of God, it shares the quality of God. This is stated inLuke 1:37:
For no word from God shall be void of power.(Revised Version)
The word of God is powerful. As God is powerful, so also is His word. So, the “Word" was God (in John 1:1) in the sense that it has the quality of God but not used as a noun but as an adjective. If it were a noun it would have had an article in the Greek text, not just theos (God), but ho theos (the God).
In both the James Moffatt and Edgar Goodspeed translations of the bible, this point is rendered more clearly the Word was divine. “Divine" is definitely an adjective modifying the term “Word" So the term “God" in the phrase “the Word is God?indicates the quality of the “Word" The use of the term “God" here is analogous to the use of the term “gold" in the statement “Time is gold." “Gold" is not used here as a noun; it functions as an adjective modifying the term “time" to emphasize its value, i.e., golden.
so sa pagkakaalam ko sa sinabi mo, HINDI KAYO BIAS?...sige pag-usapan natin yan...
sabi sa CEV at NLT ng Phil 2:6
CEV - CHRIST WAS TRULY GOD
NLT - HE WAS GOD
sa Rom 9:5 (LAMSA) "...from among whom Christ appeared in the flesh, who is GOd over all,"...
at di na kailangang sabihin pa ni Cristo na siya ay DIyos dahil ang AMA mismo ang nagsabi nyan...
Heb 1:8 (LAMSA) "...Thy throne, O God..."...
and in other declaration, John said...
Rev 17:14 These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings:
Jesus is the lamb of God (John 1:29,36)...
who is the Lord of Lords?, it is God (Deut 10:17)...
so it is very clear that "CHRIST IS GOD", and i believe that the INCM are preaching "another gospel" (Gal 1:6), that was brought by the false preacher (Mat 24:11), in our time which is perilous (2Ti 3:1)...
Michael (former INC officer)
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
In the the Revised Standard Version it say's:
"But of the Son he says, 'Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever, the righteous scepter is the scepter of thy kingdom.' "
By admitting that God is calling His Son as "O God" in Hebrews 1:8, it appears that God contradicts Himself! He said in Isaiah 46:9 that He does not know any other God. However There is another rendition that Christ is God advocates hide everytime they use this verse as their alleged proof.
But others are frank enough to indicate it in the footnote of the RSV we quoted above it writes "GOD IS YOUR THRONE" exactly how it was rendered in the Old Testament where it was quoted in Psalms 45:6 of the Jewish Publication Society version of 1917.
The truth is that the term O THEOS is not found in the Hebrew Bible also called the Masoretic Text. The O THEOS was taken from the Septuagint, a Greek translation of the Old Testament Even there, according to B.F. wescott
"The LXX admits of two renderings: ho theos can be taken as a vocative in both cases (_Thy throne, O God,... therefore, O God, Thy God..._) or it can be taken as the subject (or the predicate) in the first case (_God is Thy throne,_ or _Thy throne is God..._), or in apposition to ho theos sou in the second case (_Therefore God, even Thy God..._)..."("The Epistle to the Hebrews," London, 1892, pp. 25)
In the Hebrew Bible, God is the throne of the Son which is a metaphor indicating that God is the source of the Son's throne or power. Jesus confirmed that in Matthew 28:18 when he proclaimed that "all power in heaven and on earth was given to me" and in Matthew 11:27, he said that "all things were given to him by the Father!" The source of his power and authority is God and on Judgment Day, the Son will be placed under God's rule (I Cor. 15:27-28 TEV).
Why will the Son be placed under God if he is of the same power with the Father? That is an intriguing question that Trinitarians could not explain but would only resort to hide behind the so-called mystery doctrine of the Divine Trinity.
MANY ATTEMPT TO prove that Christ is God by using verses in the Bible. One such verse they claim to be teaching about the deity of Christ is Hebews 1:8: "But to the Son He says: `Your throne, O God, is forever and ever; a scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your Kingdom`."(NKJV) Proponent's of Christ alleged diety argue that in this verse, God the Father is calling His Son God. But if this were true, then there would be two Gods-a conclusion that contradicts biblical verses which teach that there is only one true God, the Father (Jn.17:1-3; ICor.8:6; Mal.2:10). Therefore, there is something wrong about their understanding of this verse.
The following are other translations of this same verse:
"But of the Son he says, `God is your throne forever and ever! And a righteous sceptre is the sceptre of his kingdom!`" (Goodspeed)
"He says of the Son, `God is thy throne for ever and ever, thy royal sceptre is the sceptre of equity`." (Moffat Translation)
In the Goodspeed and Moffat translations, God the Father is not calling the Son God. Rather, God is telling the Son (Christ) that He (Father) is His (Son's) throne. Thus, these two translations of Hebrews 1:8 do not contradict other passages of the Bible and hence, these translations of Hebrws 1:8 are correct. God does not recognize any other God
Why is it wrong to believe that the Father called Christ God in Hebrews 1:8? This is because God does not recognize any other God:
"Consult together, argue your case, and state your proofs that idol worship pays. Who made these things known long ago? What idol ever told you they would happen? Was it not I, the LORD? For there is no other God but me-a just God and Savior-no, not one!" (Is. 45:21, NLT, emphasis ours) God Himself teaches that there is no onther God besides Him. This one God who does not recignize any other God is the Father who created everything: "Have we not all one Father? Has not one God created us?" (Mal. 2:10, NKJV) Not only does God not recognize any other God, but he declared His uniqueness, proclaiming there is none like Him:
"Remember the former things of old, For I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like me." (Is. 46:9,ibid.)
In fact, the next verse, Hebrews 1:9, in reference to Christ, clearly shows that Christ the Son recognizes God:
"You have loved righteousness and hated lawlessness; therefore God, Your God, has anointed You with the oil of gladness more than Your companions." (Ibid., emphasis ours)
Take note of the phrase "Your God." If the Son or Christ were God, it would appear that God has a God, ang thus, there would be two Gods.
While the father recognizes no one else as God, Christ recognizes the father as His God:
"Jesus said to her, `Do not cling to Me, for I have not yet ascended to My father; but go to My Brethren and say to them, "I am ascending to My Father and your Father, and to My God and your God"." (Jn.20:17, Ibid.)
`Thy throne, given of God`
Defenders of Christ's alleged deity further argue that the Almighty God cannot be merely a throne. So they ask, "How could the understanding that God is the throne of Christ be correct?" We should know that Hebrwes 1:8 is a prophecy about the coming Messiah in the form of a song quoted from psalms 45:7 which states:
"Thy throne, given of God, endureth for ever and ever; the sce
ptre of thy kingdom." (Jewish Publications Society of America Translation) Therefore, the equivalent of "God is your throne" is "Thy throne, given of God." The following verses clarify that the One to whom God will give His kingdom is the King:
"Beautiful words fill my mind, as I compose this song for the king. Like the pen of a good writer my tongue is ready with a poem. You are the most handsome of men; you are an eloquent speaker. God has always blessed you. Buckle on your sword, mighty king; you are glorious and majestic." (Ps. 45:1-3, TEV)
The fulfillment of this prophecy is Christ who was given the throne of David:
"You will become pregnant and give birth to a son, and you will name him Jesus. He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High God. The Lord God will make him a king, as his ancestor David was, and he will be the king of the descendants of Jacob forever; his kingdom will never end!" (Lk. 1:31-33, Ibid)
In fact, Christ never taught that the authority or power He had was inherent in Him:
"Jesus drew near and said to them, "have been given all authority in heaven and on earth'."(Mt. 28:18, Ibid)
Instead , He acknowlegded the Father as the source os His authority:
"My Father has given to me authority over everything." (Mt. 11:27, NLT)
It is this God-given authority that Christ will hand over to God on the Day of Judgement:
"Then the end will come; Christ will overcome all spiritual rulers, authorities, and powers, and will hand over the Kingdom to God the Father. For christ must rule until God defeats all enemies and puts them under his feet. ...For the scriptures says, `God put all things under his feet'. It is clear, of course, that the words `all things` do not include God himself, who puts all things under Christ. But when all things have been placed under Christ's rule, then he himself, the Son, will place himself under God will rule completely over all." (I Cor. 15:24-25, 27_28, TEV)
Notice that Christ will place Himself under God so that God will rule completely over all. If Christ were God, it would appear that God is placing Himself under Himself-an absurdity.
Christ is man
While God's throne was given to Christ, this does not mean that God Himself is placed under Christ as the above verses attest. In fact, Christ sits at the right side of God's throne according to the same author of Hebrews 1:8:
"What I mean is that we have a high priest who sits at the right side of God's great throne in heaven." (Heb. 8:1, CEV)
The High Priest reffered to is Christ:
"That is why we have a great High Priest who has gone to heaven, Jesus the Son of God." (Heb. 4:14, NLT)
The High Priest who sits at the right side of God's throne is man in state of being:
"Here is the High Priest we need. A man who is holy, faultless, unstained, seperate from sinners and lifted above the very Heavens." (Heb. 7:26, Philips Translation)
"But this man, because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood." (Heb. 7:24, KJV)
Since Christ is man, then He is different from God because God is not man: "I will not execute the fierceness of My anger; I will not again destroy Ephraim. For I am God, and not man, The Holy One in your midst; And I will not come with terror." (Hos. 11:9, NKJV)
Hence, Christ, the High Priest sitting at the right of God's throne, is man and not God. Therefore, Hebrews 1:8 does not teach that Christ is God. Instead, it all the more proves the great difference between God and Christ
In the KJV, Romans 9:5 reads:
"Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen." Or the way the RSV reads: "to them belong the patriarchs, and of their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ. God who is over all be blessed for ever. Amen."
In this version, it would appear that Christ is over all and is God for ever. The Father is over all Apostle Paul who wrote Romans 9:5 also wrote Ephesians 4:6 which states:
”One God and Father of all, who is above all, and in you all”(Ibid) The Father—and not the Son—is over all. In fact, if Christ the Son is above all, then this would contradict His own statement, “My Father is greater than I”(Jn.14:28, NKJV).If the Father is greater than Christ, Christ is not above all, then He cannot be the true mentioned in Romans 9:5. This is also proven by the fact that the Son will submit all authority to the Father, proving that He is under the Fathers authority and power:
“For ‘He has put all things under his feet’. But when He says ‘all thingsare put under Him’, it is evident that He who put all things under Him is excepted.now when all things are made subject to Him, then the Son himself will also be subject to Him who put all things under Him, that God may be all in all.”(I Cor. 15:27-28, Ibid) As Further proof that Christ is not above all, Apostle Paul wrote that
“the head of Christ is God”(! Cor.11:3.KJV)
Therefore the phrase, which was rendered in a way to prove that Christ is God over all, contradicts other parts of the bible, proving it was wrongly translated.
God blessed forever
Let us now analyze the part of the verse alleged to indicate that Christ is the God blessed forever. If we examine other statements of Apostle Paul, it is clear that the God who is to be blessed and praised forever is not Jesus Christ, the Son of God, but the Father:
“Blessed be the God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies and God of all comfort.”(II Cor. 1:3,NKJV)
Even in the same letter to the Romans, Apostle Paul taught that the god who should be praised is the Father:
“Then all of you together will praise God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.”(Rom. 15:6 CEV)
This does not mean that Christ should not be praised or worshiped.In fact, all Christians are commanded to to worship and praise Jesus Christ:
“Then God gave Christ the highest place and honored his name above all others.So at the name of Jesus everyone will bow down, those in heaven, on earth, and under the earth. And to the glory of God the Father will openly agree,’Jesus Christ is Lord!”(Philip. 2;9-11, Ibid)
Christ should be praised and worshiped, not because He is God, but because it is for the Glory of God (Philip.2:9-11).Therefore, the Father—and not Christ—is mntioned in Romans 9:5 as God who should be blessed or praised.
A doxology to God
In Romans 9:5 of the RSV, Christ is not the one referred to as God:
“To them belong the patriarchs, and of their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ.God who is over all be blessed forever. Amen.”
In the RSV, the segment that says “God who is over all be blessed forever” was rendered as a separate sentence, showing it to be a doxology or praise to God, the Father. According to The Interpreter’s Biblethe majority of modern scholars also accept the RSV rendition of the verse:
“This half verse has been the center of interminable controversy. The issue appears from a comparison of our two texts. Is God over all, be blessed forever (or the one who is over all, God blessed forever) a phrase in apposition with “Christ” and belonging in the same sentence as the rest of vs. 5(so the KJV and the RSV mg.), or is this phrase grammatically separate, a doxology to God at the end of the recital of privileges of Israel (so the RSV and most modern translators)?The question cannot be answered on the basis of Greek since it is a matter almost entirely of punctuation, and Greek MSS in the early period were not punctuated...but the choice is probably to be made between the KJV and the RSV translations. The majority of modern commentators favor the later because of the unlikelihood of paul’s having here referred to Christ as ‘God.”( vol.9, p.540)
Note that the majority of modern commentators do not believe that Apostle Paul referred to Christ as God. This same observation was also noted y the translators who wrote A Translator’s Handbook on Paul’s Letter to the Romans:
“Although there are strong grammatical arguments to the contrary, the USB textual committee prefers the reading represented in the TEV, principally on the basis that Paul elsewhere never calls Christ God. Most modern English translations prefer the rendering represented in the TEV (so RSV, NEB, NAB, Goodspeed, Moffat0.”(p.180)
According to his scholarly handbook, “most modern English translations prefer the rendering represented in the TEV.” The reason for this preference is the same: “Paul elsewhere never calls Christ God” TheToday’s English Version renders Romans 9:5 thus:
“They are descended from the famous Hebrew ancestors, and Christ, as a human being, belongs to their race. May God, who rules over all, be praised forever! Amen.”
As the verse clearly states, Christ is a human being and not God. Comparing this to other books in the Holy Scriptures would reveal many verses that prove that God is not man (Hos. 11:9; Ezek. 28:2 ;Num. 23:9). Hence, Christ is not the One referred to as God in Romans 9:5. Those who try to use Romans 9:5 in proving that Christ is God are praising another Jesus different from the One preached by the apostles.
your article said..."The truth is that the term O THEOS is not found in the Hebrew Bible..."
that statement is so FOOLISH, it is true that "O THEOS" is not found in the Hebrew Bible simply because "O THEOS" is in greek!...the Hebrew said "'elohiym" chich means GOD and this is the plural of 'eloah'...THEOS and ELOHIYM is the same or synonymous...
if we follow "God is your throne forever and ever!", it also contradicts John 14:28 which says that the FAther is greater than Christ, so how dare it is for Christ to make his Father his throne?...
psalms 45:7 which states:"Thy throne, given of God, endureth for ever and ever; the sceptre of thy kingdom." (Jewish Publications Society of America Translation)
that verse Psal 45:7 is not even complete, "in the KJV it said "Thou lovest righteousness, and hatest wickedness: therefore God, thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows."...and this is the same as in Heb 1:9...
therefore the topic of that particular verse is that THY GOD HATH ANOINTED THEE, there is no such thing as GOD IS THE THRONE OF CHRIST!...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
the article also said...
"While God's throne was given to Christ, this does not mean that God Himself is placed under Christ as the above verses attest. In fact, Christ sits at the right side of God's throne according to the same author of Hebrews 1:8:"...
REPLY...
that is another FOOLISH statement because it's in CONTRADICTION...
the contradiction is as follows...
"GOD's THRONE WAS GIVEN TO CHRIST" vs. "Christ sits at the right side of God's throne"...
now how can Christ sit at the right side of GOd when GOd already given His throne to Christ?...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Isa 46:9 Remember the former things of old: for I [am] God, and [there is] none else; [I am] God, and [there is] none like me,
but why it is said "[I am] God, and [there is] none like me,"???...
bacause people in those times make a god of gold, in other words, graven images...
Isa 46:6 They lavish gold out of the bag, and weigh silver in the balance, [and] hire a goldsmith; and he maketh it a god: they fall down, yea, they worship.
that's why God declared these words...
Isa 46:5 To whom will ye liken me, and make [me] equal, and compare me, that we may be like?
this is true, because GOD IS ALMIGHTY and ALL POWERFUL so we cannot compare him to other god like images!...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"I will not execute the fierceness of My anger; I will not again destroy Ephraim. For I am God, and not man, The Holy One in your midst; And I will not come with terror." (Hos. 11:9, NKJV)...
REPLY...
this verse does not say that GOD CANNOT BECOME A MAN...
let us bare in mind that there is no impossible with GOd, he is Almighty (Luk 1:37 For with God nothing shall be impossible.)...
in fact the topic of that verse is the difference between the ANGER of GOD and the ANGER of MAN, why?, let's take one example...
when A Man is ANGRY, the Bible states...
Pro 29:22 An angry man stirreth up strife, and a furious man aboundeth in transgression.
But the ANGER OF GOD is different...
Psa 145:8 The LORD [is] gracious, and full of compassion; slow to anger, and of great mercy.
in other words when MAN IS ANGRY, he can sometimes make SINS and in his heart has HATE, while if GOD IS ANGRY, he is merciful and he does not sin because God is Love...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
in conclusion, CHRIST IS THE SON of GOD, and of course his FAther is GOD so it's logical and BIblical that Christ is GOD!...
Michael (former INC officer)
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
let's see ROm 9:5 in your favorite LAMSA translation...
ROm 9:5 (LAMSA) And the fathers, from whom Christ appeared in the flesh, who is God over all, to whom are due praises and thanksgiving for ever and ever. Amen.
this verse should not be interpreted that CHRIST is ABOVE the FATHER coz it is written that the FAther is Greater than Christ (John 14:28)...
in many translations of the BIble, the pronoun "WHO" there surely reffers to CHRIST...
(KJV)
Whose [are] the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ [came], who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.
NIV
Theirs are the patriarchs, and from them is traced the human ancestry of Christ, who is God over all, forever praised! [fn1] Amen.
(ESV)
To them belong the patriarchs, and from their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ who is God over all, blessed forever. Amen.
(ASV)
whose are the fathers, and of whom is Christ as concerning the flesh, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.
AMPLIFIED
To them belong the patriarchs, and as far as His natural descent was concerned, from them is the Christ, Who is exalted and supreme over all, God, blessed forever! Amen (so let it be).
(TNIV)
Theirs are the patriarchs, and from them is traced the human ancestry of the Messiah, who is God over all, forever praised! [a] Amen.
these translations agree with one another that the WHO there reffers to Christ, who is over all God...
but the declaration in JOhn 14:28 is the relationship between the FATHER and the SON, that's why Jesus said "for my Father is greater than I."...
he did not say "GOD IS GREATER THAN I" or "GOD IS GREATER THAN CHRIST"...
I Cor. 15:27-28 says the same, it's the relation between the FATHER and the SON,...since it is written "Son also himself be subject unto him"...
and of course this is Biblical since a SON must be subject to his Father and his FAther is greater than the Son, why?, because Jesus is "THE SON", so he must listen!...
Pro 1:8 My son, hear the instruction of thy father, and forsake not the law of thy mother:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Let us now analyze the part of the verse alleged to indicate that Christ is the God blessed forever. If we examine other statements of Apostle Paul, it is clear that the God who is to be blessed and praised forever is not Jesus Christ, the Son of God, but the Father:
“Blessed be the God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies and God of all comfort.”(II Cor. 1:3,NKJV)
REPLY...
"NOT JESUS" be blessed?...let's see in another verse...
1Ti 6:15 (KJV) Which in his times he shall shew, [who is] the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords;
who is the "the King of kings, and Lord of lords;"???...it's the LAMB...
Rev 17:14 (KJV) These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings: and they that are with him [are] called, and chosen, and faithful.
who is the LAMB?, CHRIST is...
Jhn 1:36 (KJV) And looking upon Jesus as he walked, he saith, Behold the Lamb of God!
so CHRIST IS ALSO BLESSED, and also praise for ever and ever...
1Pe 4:11 If any man speak, [let him speak] as the oracles of God; if any man minister, [let him do it] as of the ability which God giveth: that God in all things may be glorified through Jesus Christ, to whom be praise and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
now in Phil 2:9-11, the article said, "Christ should be praised and worshiped, not because He is God, but because it is for the Glory of God"...
again, this is in relationship of the FATHER and the SON coz it is the commandment of the Father that we should hear Christ...
Luk 9:35 And there came a voice out of the cloud, saying, This is my beloved Son: hear him.
in other words, if we obey Christ (the SON), and worship him, God the FAther will be glorified...
Christ ask the Father to glorify Him, now what kind of a man can say such a thing that you ask the FAther who is ALLPOWERFUL glorify his creation?...
Jhn 17:1 These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee:
did Jesus make a mistake?, of course not because he has no sin (1 Pet 2:22)...but why did he say that?...
because...Jhn 13:32 If God be glorified in him, God shall also glorify him in himself, and shall straightway glorify him.
so vice versa, the FAther glorify the SOn and the Son also glorify the Father...
and if Jesus is ONLY A MAN, and NOT GOD, how come he receieves GLORY with the FATHER before the word was?, can a non-existing being receieve glory???...
Jhn 17:5 And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.
now, that's another proof that Jesus is indeed God!
Michael (former INC officer)
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
"I will not execute the fierceness of My anger; I will not again destroy Ephraim. For I am God, and not man, The Holy One in your midst; And I will not come with terror." (Hos. 11:9, NKJV)...
REPLY...
this verse does not say that GOD CANNOT BECOME A MAN...
let us bare in mind that there is no impossible with GOd, he is Almighty (Luk 1:37 For with God nothing shall be impossible.)...
So where in the Bible can you read that God really wanted to become man?
in conclusion, CHRIST IS THE SON of GOD, and of course his FAther is GOD so it's logical and BIblical that Christ is GOD!...
So it would appear that there are now two Gods, which is contradictory to what the Bible truly teaches.
"GOD's THRONE WAS GIVEN TO CHRIST" vs. "Christ sits at the right side of God's throne"...
now how can Christ sit at the right side of GOd when GOd already given His throne to Christ?...
The Bible doesn't contradict itself. You're only making the verses contradict each other.
and if Jesus is ONLY A MAN, and NOT GOD, how come he receieves GLORY with the FATHER before the word was?, can a non-existing being receieve glory???...
You said that there's nothing impossible with God. So how come you're limiting what God can possibly do? BTW we don't believe that Jesus is ONLY A MAN. He's a MAN who never committed any sin.
If the "God" being referred to in Rom. 9:5 is the Lord Jesus Christ, and if we are to accept the Heb. 1:8 translations as Christ allegedly being a God, then it would appear that there are two Gods - contradictory again to what the Bible truly teaches (i.e. John 17:1-3).
So where in the Bible can you read that God really wanted to become man?
REPLY...
simple, sa John 1:14 NAGKATAWANG TAO ANG SALITA, natural DIYOS yung salita, now isn't this easy?...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
So it would appear that there are now two Gods, which is contradictory to what the Bible truly teaches.
REPLY...
there is only one God, it's all in your mind that there are TWO GODS!...
like the husband and wife, in our sight they are TWO FLESH but in the sight/law of God they are ONE FLESH!...
how is it that there is only one God?, because it is written...
but since it is written also that Jesus is God, we should not take into conclusion that there are TWO GODS!...Jesus is separate from the Father coz he is the Word of God...and the word was God!...
the God i am reffering is the maker of the heavens and the earth...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Bible doesn't contradict itself. You're only making the verses contradict each other.
REPLY...
your article declared it, not me...READ!
"While God's throne was given to Christ, this does not mean that God Himself is placed under Christ as the above verses attest. In fact, Christ sits at the right side of God's throne according to the same author of Hebrews 1:8:"...
this is a contradiction...
"GOD's THRONE WAS GIVEN TO CHRIST" vs. "Christ sits at the right side of God's throne"...
Christ have TWO THRONES???...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
You said that there's nothing impossible with God. So how come you're limiting what God can possibly do? BTW we don't believe that Jesus is ONLY A MAN. He's a MAN who never committed any sin.
REPLY...
it's not about "there's nothing impossible with God", but God already give his throne to Christ because your article claimed that...
"God's throne was given to Christ"...
so will God take back His throne? and let Christ sit at his right hand?...
you said..."we don't believe that Jesus is ONLY A MAN"...my question is this, coz we are talking about his nature or LIKAS NA KALAGAYAN, not his character or attitude, etc...what else is Christ' LIKAS NA KALAGAYAN, is he ONY A MAN or something else???...
remember LIKAS NA KALAGAYAN, his BEING...it's not about HE DOES NOT SIN, HE IS A SAVIOUR, etc...but HIS NATURE OR LIKAS NAKALAGAYAN (PHYSILCAL)...???
Michael (former INC officer)
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
BTW, sinasagot kita ngayon dahil matino kang kausap ngayon di gaya ng dati...sasagutin ko as much as possible lahat ng katanungan mo kung lagi kang ganito, di me importante dito siguro para sa inyo, but i want the truth!...
Michael (former INC officer)
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
(Login michael_a2007)
i3answers...
No score for this post April 9 2008, 7:57 PM
how is it that there is only one God?, because it is written...
but since it is written also that Jesus is God, we should not take into conclusion that there are TWO GODS!...
Vs.
Jesus is separate from the Father coz he is the Word of God...and the word was God!... Eli Soriano:"Ang taong nagkakakontra-kontra ang sinasabi, 'yung medyo may sira ulo 'non."
dito pala si michelle ang tagapag tanggol ni gudkisser.
papasyalin mo naman dito ang papa mo michelle si gudkisser.
usap kami ni kulokoy kanina eh, gusto raw sana nya mag post dito kaya lang natatakot daw sya dahil baka raw makuha ang ip nya.
gawain kasi nya eh kaya natatakot sa sariling multo.
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Aminin mo na lang kasi na talagang kontra-kontra ang paninindigan mo tungkol sa aral kung sino talaga ang tunay na Diyos. Diyan pa lang dumarami na ang mga kontrahan blues mo.
[(Login michael_a2007)
i3answers...
No score for this post April 27 2008, 8:48 AM
...
kaya nga, so you should base your answers from the bible not by BOOKS like DR RYRIES...
Michael (former INC officer)]
Say that to yourself. Kung totoo na existing na ang Panginoong Jesucristo sa kanyang likas na kalagayan mismo before the creation of the world, at hindi panukala pa lang ng Panginoon Diyos, eh di dapat malinaw na itinuro yan sa Old Testament. So far wala ka pang ipinapakitang talata sa Biblia sa OT bilang pruweba.
1Cr 10:4 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.
meron ba namang sumusunod na NON-EXISTENCE???...lol!...
and the fact that ginawa ang lahat ng bagay SA PAMAMAGITAN niya ay natural EXISTED SIYA (John 1:3, 1 Cor 8:6)...
yan bibliya yan, ikaw?, ano proof mo?, LIBRO na ang nagsulat ay mga DEMONYO? (wika ninyo yan dahil sabi ng pasugo ninyo na ang mga protestante at katoliko ay sa demonyo)...
Michael (former INC officer)
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
(Login michael_a2007)
i3answers...
No score for this post May 1 2008, 2:29 AM
...
1Cr 10:4 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.
meron ba namang sumusunod na NON-EXISTENCE???...lol!...
and the fact that ginawa ang lahat ng bagay SA PAMAMAGITAN niya ay natural EXISTED SIYA (John 1:3, 1 Cor 8:6)...
yan bibliya yan, ikaw?, ano proof mo?, LIBRO na ang nagsulat ay mga DEMONYO? (wika ninyo yan dahil sabi ng pasugo ninyo na ang mga protestante at katoliko ay sa demonyo)...
Michael (former INC officer) Puro ka lang pala satsat eh, OLD TESTAMENT verses, hindi new testament verses at diversionary tactics ang hinahanap ko.
Biblia daw o, suriin natin: "and the fact that ginawa ang lahat ng bagay SA PAMAMAGITAN niya
ay natural EXISTED SIYA (John 1:3, 1 Cor 8:6)..." Existed? Kongklusyon mo lang 'yan eh.. 'yan ba ang proof mo? Nakasakay lang sa kongklusyon at hindi sa itinuturo ng Biblia?
wala NI ISA na nagsasabing "CHRIST IS NOT GOD"...yan ang patunayan nyo kahit anong translation and version and language of the Bible...
simple lang naman, "ANYONG DIYOS"...
may anyo o wala?, meron kaya nga anyong Diyos eh...
eh ano ang anyo niya?, natural DIYOS kaya nga sinabing anyong DIyos eh...
isa pa sabi mo, ANYONG DIYOS ay hindi literal, tapos baka kumambyo ka sa sagot sa tanong na ito...
sabi mo NAG-ANYONG ALIPIN, so alipin ba?, oo naman dahil una di naman sila mayaman at ipinanganak si Cristo sa sabsaban o manger...
LIKENESS OF MEN - tao ba?, oo naman dahil NAGKATAWANG TAO NGA (John 1:14)...
hehe tila yata ang "ANYONG DIYOS" lang ang hindi literal pero ang iba literal na, lol don't be BIAS tsong...
talagang MATIGAS ang puso ninyo, dahil sa mga mali ninyong aral...
SI CRISTO BA AY PARUPARO?
FROM MICHELLE: "wala NI ISA na nagsasabing "CHRIST IS NOT GOD"...yan ang patunayan nyo kahit anong translation and version and language of the Bible..."
MERON BANG MABABASA SA BIBLYA NA "CHRIST IS NOT A BUTTERFLY?"
MERON BANG MABABASA SA BIBLYA NA "CHIRST IS NOT AN INSECT?"
SINABI SA BIBLYA NA SI CRISTO AY TAO, SO PDE DING PANIWALAAN NA SYA AY INSECT DAHIL "WALA NI ISA NA NAGSABING "CHRIST IS NOT AN INSECT?". KAHIT ANONG VERSION NG BIBLYA MICHELLE!
SABI NI MICHELLE: "talagang MATIGAS ang puso ninyo, dahil sa mga mali ninyong aral... ANO TAWAG SA ULO MO MICHELLE?
HAR HAR HAR HAR! MAGULO UTAK NI MICHELLE...SINABI NA NI CRISTONG "AKO AY TAO, OR ANG AMA KO, TAONG TOTOO, ETC PERO HIRIT PA DIN NG "WALA NMANG NAKALAGAY SA BIBLE NA HINDI DIOS SI CRISTO!
HAR HAR HAR HAR...ETO YUN MICHELLE:
MICHELLE: "AKO PO AY TUNAY NA LALAKE! SWEAR, PROMISE PO!"
ARGUMENTO NI MICHELLE:
"PERO WALA NAMAN AKONG SINABI AT WALANG MABABASA NA NA AKO AY HINDI BAKLA!"
WWAAAAA HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR ANG CUTE NI MICHELLE.. PAG FIVE (5) YEARS OLD TALAGA NAKAKA ALIW..
CONDOLENCE..ISANG TOPIC PA LANG LAGLAG TUKA KA NA NAMAN! MANGMANG NA, SA DIABLO PA, AT ETO MALUPIT... BAKLLAAAA PA! HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR!
MAGSURI KA PA SA ARAL NI MAM ELI D GAY SORIANO NA HINDI TAMA LHAT, NOT ALL PEOPLE BUT MOSTLY TAMA! HAR HAR HAR HAR MAY TAMA KA NA NGA!
YAHOO MAM ELI ALAM KONG MAY ACCES KA DITO SA "HINTERNET" ALI ALI KENI.. PLS LANG PAG MAG PAPADALA KA NG ALAGAD MO AY HWAG FROM D HAPPY CHRISTIEN GROUP.. SI MICHELLE AY MAGALING MAGPATAWA HINDI MAGALING SUMAGOT! HAR HAR HAR HAR! PERO WAG MO SYANG BABAWIIN DITO SA FORUM HA, NAKAKA-ALIS NG PAGOD! HAR HAR HAR HAR!
- "Aba eh normal yung ma-attract ka sa kapwa mo lalaki, it comes out naturally from a person." NYA HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HIKS HIKS HIKS HIKS HIKS HIKS..MAGLIGAWAN KAUNG MGA LALAKI SA KULTO NYO..NORMAL LANG YAN SBI NG DAKILANG SUGO NG KADILIMAN...NON OTHER THAN THE EVER FAMOUS "MAM ELI SORIANO"
- "BAWAL ANG MAG ASAWA SA KULTO NILA, EXCEPT OFCOURSE SA MGA OFFICERS NYA. PERO SYA AYAW DIN MAG ASAWA"
- Subukan mong magtanong na hindi nya alam ang sagot or alam nyang nabuking mo na mali sya.."Eh Gago ka pla eh, Tarantado kang matanda ka eh"
- Walang humpay na kotongan ng pera na itinago nya sa katagang ABULUYAN.
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Talakayan ng mga duktrina at sinasabi ni Eli Soriano at ng kanyang Ang Dating Daan.
Ano mang mga isyu tungkol kay Eli Soriano ng Ang Dating Daan ay pwedeng pag-usapan dito. Lahat ng taga-pagtangol ng Ang Dating Daan ni Eli Soriano ay ina-anyayahan na ipagtangol ang anumang sa inaakala nyong di wasto ang mga sinasabi dito sa forum na ito at makaka-asa kayong di mawawala o di mabubura ang inyong mga kasagutan.
Ang maaari lang mabura o ma-delete ay ang mga sumusunod....
1.Malicious codes
2.Mga pics na hindi na katangap-tangap
3.Nang-gugulo lamang sa forum
Listahan ng IP Kaanib sa Ang Dating Daan ni Eli Soriano na nangugulo dito sa forum.....
