Catholic Faith Defenders of the Diocese of Bacolod, Philippines

Ang totoo pala ay si Eliseo Soriano ang umatras nang maraming beses!

2012-02-03T23:01:00.000-08:00

2012-01-04T00:45:00.000-08:00

Radio Program 2012:

Tuesday - 3pm to 4pm (Ang Liwan nga Dalan)

Saturday - 3pm to 4pm (Ang Liwan nga Dalan)

Sunday - 2pm to 3pm (Ang Liwan nga Dalan)
Sunday - 3pm to 4pm (Historia Sagrada)

DYRL ABYAN RADYO 1035KHZ: Live audio streaming - http://dyrl.blogspot.com/
Sunday - 6am to 630am (Ang Liwan nga Dalan)

PROGRAM DETAILS:
* Ang Liwan nga Dalan - Catholic Apologetics, Catechetics, Christian Morality, Interviews, Church News, Dialogues and Debates.

* Historia Sagrada - Biblical History, History of Saints and Church History.

For questions or comments: 09193361048 and (034) 434-1143.

ANG KAMALIAN NI SORIANO UKOL SA PAGTUTURO: NAGPAPATUNAY BA NG SOLA SCRIPTURA PRINCIPLE ANG ROMA 15:4? Sinulat ni: Bro. Rey V. Entila CFD, DIOCESE OF BACOLOD 8/21/09

2009-10-05T18:40:00.000-07:00

TALATA:

Rom.15:4 – Sapagka’t ang anomang mga bagay na isinulat nang una ay nangasulat dahil sa ikatututo natin, upang sa pamamagitan ng pagtitiis at pag-aliw ng mga kasulatan ay mangagkaroon tayo nga pag-asa.

Para kay Ka Eli, itong Roma 15:4 ay patunay raw na sapat na ang nakasulat sa Biblia, hindi na kailangan ng Apostolic Tradition at Pagtuturo ng Simbahan (Church Magisterium). Pero saan nakasulat diyan na Biblia lamang ay sapat na? Wala naman a, di ba? Ang sinasabi riyan ay “anomang mga bagay na isinulat nang una ay nangasulat dahil sa ikatututo natin”, past tense ‘yan, ano sa tingin mo? Ang isinasaad ni San Pablo ay dapat yaong mga Kristiyano na sinulatan niya noon ay matuto sa mga isinulat noong una. Ano yung tinutukoy niya na nakasulat noong una? Hindi siya tumutukoy sa Bagong Testamento na hindi pa nga nabuo, KUNDI sa mga nakasulat sa LUMANG TIPAN!

Kung ito ang proof-text mo, Ka Eli, e di Lumang Tipan lang sapat na sa ‘yo at sa mga disipulos mo, hehe. Kita mo, kahit anong talata sa Biblia ang gamitin mo, WALA ka talaga, KAHI’T ISA man lang na makakatulong sa man-made o Luther-made na docktrinang Biblia lamang ay sapat sa pagtuturo ng dalisay na pananampalataya. Sige pa, halungkatin mo pa ang buong Biblia, ang masasabi ko lamang sa iyo ay sayang lang ang oras mo at ng mga nakikinig sa iyo. Sinabi mo na lahat nga aral mo, basahin mo sa Biblia. E wala ka ngang mababasa e. O, nakita mo na, UNBIBLICAL pala ang presupposition mo at nang buong Protestantismo na Biblia lamang (Bible Alone), at nagbunga nang libu-libong mga magkasasalungat na mga aral tulad nang mga pinangangaral mo.

Kahit ano mo pang ikot sa mga tao upang pag-isahin laban sa Katolikong Simbahan, ay di mo makayang gibain ang katotohanan na si Kristo ay nagtatag ng kanyang simbahan upang MAGTURO (Magisterium) sa pamamagitan ng katotohanang ipinapasa mula pa sa mga Apostoles (Apostolic Tradition) at hindi sapat ang nakasulat lamang.

MGA MALING ARAL NI SORIANO TUNGKOL SA MATEO 18:15-18 Sinulat ni: Bro. Rey V. Entila CFD, DIOCESE OF BACOLOD 8/21/09

2009-10-05T18:38:00.001-07:00

Mt.18:15-17- 15 At kung magkasala laban sa iyo ang kapatid mo, pumaroon ka, at ipakilala mo sa kaniya ang kaniyang kasalanan na ikaw at siyang mag-isa: kung ikaw ay pakinggan niya, ay nagwagi ka sa iyong kapatid.
16 Datapuwa’t kung hindi ka niya pakinggan, ay magsama ka pa ng isa o dalawa, upang sa bibig ng dalawang saksi o tatlo ay mapagtibay ang bawa’t salita.
17 At kung ayaw niyang pakinggan sila, ay sabihin mo sa iglesia: at kung ayaw rin niyang pakinggan ang iglesia, ay ipalagay mo siyang tulad sa Gentil at maniningil ng buwis.

Pinagmali ni Soriano ang hayag na katotohanan na ang iglesiang itinatag ni Kristo ay siya mismong final arbiter (Supreme Court, ika nga) ng mga espiritual na bagay na di kayang ma-resolve ng mga Kristiyano. Sinabi niya na ang konteksto ng Mt.18:15-17 ay fraternal correction lamang at di ito nagpapatunay ng autoridad o Teaching Authority (Magisterium) ng Simbahan. Kung ganun, masyado yatang makitid ang pang-unawa niya sa inspiradong aklat ng Biblia!

Hindi mo yata nalalaman na ang Biblia ay dapat unawain sa magkakaibang “senses”: literal sense, spiritual sense (allegorical, moral, anagogic) at sensus plenior (fuller sense). Ang literal ay yaong konteksto. Totoong ang konteksto ay nagsasaad kung paano mag-approach sa nagkakasalang kapatid, pero ang buong konteksto ay nagpapahayag nga autoridad ng simbahan, hindi lamang sa pagtuturo ng moralidad kundi nga totoong pananampalataya rin.

Ito ang prueba, kapatid. Sa talatang 17 “At kung ayaw niyang pakinggan sila, ay sabihin mo sa IGLESIA: at kung ayaw rin niyang pakinggan ang IGLESIA, ay ipalagay mo siyang tulad sa Gentil at maniningil ng buwis.”

Anong iglesia itong dapat pakinggan? Of course, para sayo, hindi iglesia na itinatag ni Manalo (1914). Hindi rin Sabadista (1863) or Mormon (1830) o Baptist (1609) o Saksi ni Jehovah (1872). Hindi rin ito kahit anumang iglesia na Protestanteng nagsimula noong 1521 na pinagunahan ni Luther. E, ano yun para sayo, kapatid? Ah, iyon ay iglesia ni Perez (1936), na kahit sabihin mo pa na iglesia ng Dios, pero hindi talaga ang Dios ang nagtayo kundi si Ginoong Nicolas Perez!

Inaatake mo ang Iglesia ni Cristo na di dapat tawaging Iglesia ni Cristo, kundi, iglesia ni Manalo. Yun pala kung i-apply rin sa yong iglesia ay di rin dapat tawaging iglesia ng Dios, kundi iglesia ni Perez! Wala kang kawala ano, ka Eli?

E, kung ayaw mo magpailaim sa successor ni Perez na si Levita Gugulan, kasi siya’y babae, ika mo, nangyari na gumawa ka rin ng iyong iglesia na iyong ipina-rehistro sa SEC na mayroong pabago-bagong pangalan, na wari ko noon wala na yatang katapusang paghahanap ng pangalan kasi may mga nauna na sa iyong mga iglesia na may gayong pangalan.

Anong ibig sabihin nito? Simple po lamang, ang iyong iglesia ay di dapat ngang tawagin na iglesia ng Dios o iglesia ni Perez, kundi iglesia ni Soriano (1975 o 2009)! Diyan, wala ka nang problema sa SEC. Good suggestion, di ba mga miyembro ng ADD? Para makapagpahinga naman kayo ng maluwag na solo niyo talagang title na iyan.

Pero di pa rin yata kayo makapag-buntong-hininga, kasi ang itinatayong totoong iglesia ng Dios na si Kristo ay itinayo sa Jerusalem, hindi dito sa Pilipinas, at itinatag noong 30 AD, hindi 1975!

Nguni’t kung kayo ay talagang tapat sa inyong pagsasaliksik ng katotohanan, I suggest gumawa kayo ng hakbang patungong katotohanan na madali lg masyado, RELATED pa kay Eli – ang ELIMINATION TECHNIQUE! Hehe, huwag mag-panick. Simple lg ito, kahit di ka nagtapos ng elementary o high school, kaya mo ito.

Ito lang: sapagka’t nalaman natin bago lg na disqualified na ang mga iglesiang itinayo dito sa Pilipinas, including your sect, disqualified din ang mga iglesia Protestante,e ano na lg ang pipilian nyo? Dalawa na lg dambuhala at makasaysayang iglesia – iyon ay ang Orthodox Church at Catholic Church. Pero ang mga Orthodox churches ay lumabas sa Catholic church noong 1054 (kung nagbabasa ka ng World History – I hope so - aside sa “Biblia lamang” at daily news).

Therefore, isa na lg talaga ang naiwan, at wala na talagang iba pa, kundi ang totoong iglesia ng Dios na si Kristo na sa kanyang paghahari at paggabay ay lumaganap sa buong mundo (catholic = laganap, universal), na walang iba kundi ang IGLESIA KATOLIKA. “The Catholic Church is the true organization founded by Jesus Christ” (Grolier Encycl. Vol.5, p.106).

Ang tanong, kapatid na Eli at mga nasa Dating Daan, bakit hindi kayo nakikinig sa iglesia Katolika? Ang nakasulat e, kung hindi ka nakikinig sa kanya, ikaw ay bilangan bilang gentil (pagan, heathen; idolater) o ang traidor sa bayan at madayang tax collector. O sige nga, hihintayin ko ang inyong sagot.

Ano ang kapangyarihang ibinigay ni Hesukristo sa Simbahang ito? Mt.18:18 – Katotohanang sinasabi ko sa inyo (mga pinuno o obispo ng iglesia mula pa sa mga apostoles), na ang lahat ng mga bagay na inyong talian sa lupa ay tatalian sa langit: at ang lahat nga mga bagay na inyong kalagan sa lupa ay kakalagan sa langit.

Dito yata nagkakamali ang “pantas” sa Biblia. Ayaw mo kasing makinig sa iglesia e, puro iyong tinig na lang pinakikinggan mo, o iglesia lg ni Perez (1936) ang pinakinggan mo, at di mo nasisyasat ng mabuti at pakinggan ang iglesia Katolika na pinag-iwanan mo. Ika nga ni Rizal e, itinapon mo ang diamante upang kunin mo ang karaniwang bato.

ANG PAGKAKAMALI NI SORIANO SA KAHULUGAN NG JEREMIAS 6:16 Sinulat ni: Bro. Rey V. Entila CFD, DIOCESE OF BACOLOD 8/20/09

2009-10-05T18:36:00.001-07:00

Jer.6:16 - Ganito ang sabi ng Panginoon, Magsitayo kayo sa mga daan at magsitingin kayo, at ipagtanong ninyo ang mga dating landas, kung saan nandoon ang mabuting daan; at magsilakad kayo roon, at kayo’y mangakakaasumpong nga kapahingahan sa inyong mga kaluluwa: nguni’t kanilang sinabi, Hindi kami magsilakad doon.

Kamangha-mangha na ang isang bagong litaw na sekta na “offshoot” lamang ng sektang itinatag ni Nicolas Perez noong 1936, ay matapang na kumuha ng talata sa Lumang Tipan at mag-claim na sila ang tinutukoy roon, ang dating daan! Whew! 1975 lang itinayo ang sekta ni Soriano, pinapalabas pa na sila ang DATING DAAN sa Lumang Tipan! Di ba maliwanag na hocus-pocus ito, mga kapatid?

Ang tinutukoy sa Jer.6:16 ay ang kasaysayan ng bayan ng Dios (Israel at Judah) at ang mga espiritwal na aral na makukuha roon. E, anong, relasyon ng sekta ni Soriano roon, na mahigit 2,500 taon na agwat sa kanila? No relation at all, but a figment of Eli’s imagination!

Sapagka’t ang Lumang Tipan ay nagkakaroon ng kaganapan sa Bagong Tipan, ang Judaismo ay napalitan at naging ganap sa Kristiyanismo, ang tunay na Daan ay si Hesus (Jn.14:6) at ang kanyang bagong sambayanan ay tinawag ring Daan (Gawa 9:22). Kaya ang DATING DAAN ay hindi na aplikable sa Bagong Testamento, kundi ang Bagong Daan na siyang walang kamatayang iglesiang itinatag ni Kristo mismo. Iyon, mga kapatid, ay HINDI ang Iglesia na itinatatag ni Nicolas Perez (1936), o ni Soriano (1975) o ni Manalo (1914), as common sense tells us. Iyon ay ang totoong iglesia ni Kristo (see Catechism of the Catholic Church par. 816 “the sole Church of Christ”) na laganap sa buong mundo (Catholic = universal)!

O, sige nga, mga miyembro ng Dating Daan, ibigay niyo ang lahat ng ebidensya nyo na sa Lumang Tipan, KAYO ang tinutukoy na DATING DAAN. Tell it to the marines, hehe, ika nga!

Lalo ring wala kayong ebidensiya sa Bagong Tipan, kasi Lumang Tipan ang ginamit niyo, e hindi pala kayo yun. Ngayon, lipat naman kayo sa Bagong Tipan? Palipat-lipat pala kayo, pabago-bago ang isip at doktrina, walang-katiyakan, haha. Depende sa andar ng utak ng kanilang Founder kasi e, hindi ayon sa katotohanang di-nagbabago! E, Bagong Tipan na nga e na may bagong Daan - si Hesus at ang kanyang ITINAYONG iglesia - gawin nyo pang DATING daan. Lantaran na yatang kalokohan yan, pareng Eli. Pero, di lang masyadong halata ng iba – lalong-lalo na ng mga taga-Dating Daan. Sorry.

ANG PAGKAKAMALI NI SORIANO SA KAHULUGAN NG GAWA 15 Sinulat ni: Bro. Rey V. Entila

2009-10-05T18:35:00.000-07:00

Ang pagtutol ni Eli sa aming tv dialogue noong 2003, na si San Pedro ang Pangulo ng mga Apostol at pangulo sa Konsilyo sa Herusalem, ay lumang estilo na ng mga anti-Catholics, katulad din sa walang laman na pagtutol ni James White na Protestanteng debatedor sa America. Kaya, mga kapatid, basahing mabuti ang pamamahayag ko sa ibaba. (Note: kung di-masyado maka-gets ng sinulat ko, kasi isinulat ko noon ito sa English, magpaturo lamang sa mga kapatid nyo riyan sa Dating Daan).

Protestant Objection: “In Acts 15 we read about a council of the early Church held at Jerusalem. Much has been made of this council and its relevance for claims of Petrine primacy. Let us note the important features of this account. In verse 6 we read, ‘The apostles and the elders came together to look into this matter.” It does not say that the Pope and the apostles and the elders met. Peter is plainly considered as an Apostle, as all the rest. The council is not under the direction of Peter. As the bishop of Jerusalem, James directs the proceedings. Peter addresses the group not as a Pope, but as an Apostle used by God to bring the Gospel to the Gentiles.” (The Roman Catholic Controversy, p.112).

My Answer: It was St. Peter who presided the Council in Jerusalem, not James. It was Peter who stood up and settled the matter that no one could solve, whether the gentile converts be circumcised or not. Starting with verse 7, Peter said,

“Men and brethren, you know that a good while ago God chose among us, that by MY mouth (not Apostle James’ mouth)the Gentiles should hear the word of the Gospel and believe.”

It was actually Peter, not James, who was chosen by God to open the doors for the salvation of gentiles. Peter then argued that the Jews should not impose circumcision for the gentiles.

Verses 10-11 give the concluding remarks of Peter, “Now, therefore, why do you test God by putting a yoke on the neck of the disciples which neither our fathers nor we are able to bear? But we believe that through the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved in the same manner as they” (NKJV).

Peter has solved the problem which no other Apostle can solve. Then the whole assembly became silent after the conclusion and decision made by St. Peter.

What James did, as the host of the Council, being the bishop of Jerusalem, was to concur (agree) with what Peter had decided. In verse 19, James, not himself a member of the 12 Apostles, said:

“Therefore I judge that we (the Jews of James’ bishopric) should not trouble those from among the gentiles who are turning to God”.

James merely followed what Peter has declared for both the Jews and gentiles alike.

Mons. Bertrand Conway clarified, “The translation in the King James version of krino, ‘my sentence is’ (Acts 15:19) should be ‘I think; I am of the opinion’; as we learn from other passages of the Acts (13:46; 16:15; 26:8). James gave no special decision on the question, but merely expressed the views that had been adopted at the meeting spoken of in Gal.2:6. Moreover the decree is attributed to the Council of Apostles and Presbyters, assisted by the Holy Spirit (Acts 16:4; 15:8), and not to James personally. (The Question Box, p. 152).

Kahit ano mang paniwala ni Soriano na si Santiago ang mas pangulo pa kay Pedro, nanatiling MALING paniniwala niya iyon. Ang mge ebidensya ay nagtuturo na si San Pedro, bilang unang lider ng mga Apostoles ay siyang nag-solve ng napakahagang problema sa Konsilyo sa Herusalem. Si Santiago ay sumang-ayon lamang sa kanya.

O, ano ang maisasagot niyo mga pareng taga-Dating Daan. Mananatili pa ba kayo riyan sa Dating kamalian nyo?

ANG PAGKAKAMALI NI SORIANO SA KAHULUGAN NG 1 JUAN 1:1-4 (Ang Biblia version) Sinulat ni: Bro. Rey V. Entila (10/21/09)

2009-10-05T18:34:00.001-07:00

MGA TALATA:

1 Jn.1:1-4 – 1 Yaong buhat sa pasimula, yaong aming narinig, yaong nakita ng aming mga mata, yaong aming namasdan, at nahipo ng aming mga kamay, tungkol sa salita ng buhay

2 (at ang buhay ay nahayag, at aming nakita, at pinatotohanan, at sa inyo’y aming ibinabalita ang buhay, ang buhay na walang hanggan, na kasama ng Ama at sa atin ay nahayag);

3 Yaong aming nakita at narinig ay siya rin naming ibinabalita sa inyo, upang kayo naman ay magkaroon ng pakikisama sa amin: oo, at tayo ay may pakikisama sa Ama, at sa kaniyang Anak na si Jesukristo:

4 At ang mga bagay na ito ay aming isinususulat, upang ang ating kagalakan ay malubos.

Komentaryo: Dalawang bagay ang dapat tandaan: sa talatang 3 “ibinabalita” ni Juan sa mga Kristiyano, at sa talatang 4, “isinususulat” naman para sa mga mananamplataya. Ano ang konklusyon natin? Ito: ang “prueba” ni Soriano na ito’y nagpapakita na Biblia Lamang ang basehan, ay napakalaking PAGKAKAMALI. Dalawa nga ang binasehan dito e: ang oral Apostolic Tradition na pagbabalita, at ang written document na ito. (Expound ko pa ito later, mga kaibigan).

Isa.34:16 – Inyong saliksikin sa aklat ng Panginoon, at inyong basahin: kahit isa sa mga ito ay hindi magkukulang, walang mangangailangan ng kanyang kasama; sapagka’t iniutos nga aking bibig, at pinisan sila ng kaniyang Espiritu.

Komentaryo: Ang talatang itong ginamit ni Soriano at hindi lang niya kundi ng mga “Bible Alone” preachers, ay hindi nagsasabi na SALIKSIKIN AT BASAHIN SA AKLAT LAMANG upang malaman ang Kanyang kagustuhan. Sapagka’t Siya mismong Dios ang nag-utos sa mga propeta na mangaral spamamagitan ng salita man or sulat. Mayroon ngang mga propeta na nangaral pero hindi sumulat: si Natan, si Elias at si Eliseo (pero hindi si Eliseo Soriano, of course).

In fact, basahin mo ang unang talata nitong Kabanata 34: “Kayo’y magsilapit, kayong mga bansa, upang mangakinig; at dinggin ninyo, ninyong mga bayan…” O ano, masasabi mo Eliseo, nagsabi ba ang Dios na lahat ay isulat lamang at basahin lamang, o makinig din sa autorisadong pagtuturo? (to be continued, mga kaibigan, kapatid at magulang…)

ANG PAGKAKAMALI NI SORIANO SA KAHULUGAN NG 1 TIMOTEO 3:15 Sinulat ni: Bro. Rey V. Entila 8/21/09

2009-10-05T18:33:00.001-07:00

1 Tim.3:15 – Ngunit kung ako’y magluwat nga mahabang panahon, ay upang maalaman mo kung paano ang dapat sa mga tao na ugaliin nila sa bahay ng Dios, na siyang iglesia ng Dios na buhay, at haligi at suhay ng katotohanan.

Examination of 1 Tim.3:15

1. called also the household of God, bakit di inilagay ni Soriano ito sa titulo ng kanyang iglesia? Kulang ano?

2. not just Church of God, but Church of the living (buhay) God – bakit hindi rin isinulat tio ni Soriano kasi gusto nya raw kompleto na pangalan ng kanyang iglesia. Kulang title nya, di ba?

3. Ang Church pala, not the Bible is the pillar & ground of truth. Kung walang haligi at saligan ang katotohanan, di madaling mawala at masira sa mga haka-haka ng taong tulad ng mga “Bible Alone” preachers! Kasi di nila nakita na ang Iglesia (Katolika) pala ay siyang nag-compile, nagbantay, nagprotekta at maiging nagsalin sa mga iba’t ibang lengguahe before the advent of Protestantism!

4. that Church existed in apostolic times, not in 1975

5. Soriano “UMANIB LAMANG” sa iglesiang nasa biblia? Hehe! Tell it to the Marines, pare ko! Sinong maniwala diyan sa kanya? Kung umanib ka, sinong tumanggap sa kanya? Siya na sa 21st century ngayon, nakipagkita sa mga 1st century Christians upang sumali sa kanila? HaaaaH???? Horror story yata ito. Akala ko sa sine lang ito nangyayari, sa ADD din pala. Mabuti’t nalaman natin na nag-iimbento si Soriano ng mga man-made tradition na salungat sa Biblia.

6. Kung totoong umanib ka sa iglesiang nasa Biblia, ang pamamaraan ay sumali ka sa mga successors ng mga 1st century Christians na ma-trace mo ang linya mula 21st century, 20th, 19th,18th, 17th, 16th, 15th, hanggang sa 1st century.

7. E ano’ng iglesia yung makapag-trace ng unbroken succession mula 1st century hanngang nagyong 21st century? Of course, hindi ang ADD, INC, Pentecostal Churches, o Protestant Churches which departed from the true Church in 16th century.

8. What’s that church? It’s the Catholic church! Shocking ba? Shocking sa mga di-nagbabasa o di nag-aaral kundi nag-aaral lamang kung paano sirain ang iglesia Katolika. Kaya is Soriano is poor in history! Poor din yung kanyang mga disipulos. Sabi ni Soriano sa tv si “Didache” raw! E ang Didache ay hindi tao kundi dokumento ng mga unang Kristiyano, naisulat about 80-100 AD). Ano ba yan bro. Eli? At yang dokumentong iyan ay nagpapatunay, kung tapat mong basahin, na ang mga practices ang mga early or 1st century Christian ay yaon din ang practice ng mga katolikong kristiayno hanggang ngayon, hindi kapareho ng practices ni Soria

SORIANO'S ERROR IN 1 JOHN 4

2009-10-05T18:32:00.000-07:00

1 John 4:1-3 – 1 Mga minamahal, huwag kayong magsipaniwala sa bawa’t espiritu, kundi inyong subukin ang mga espiritu, kung sily’a sa Dios; sapagka’t maraming nagsilitaw na mga bulaang propeta sa sanglibutan.

2 Ditoy’ nakikilala ninyo ang Espiritu ng Dios: ang bawa’t espiritung nagpapahayag na si Jesucristo ay naparitong nasa laman ay sa Dios:

3 At ang bawa’t espiritung hindi ipinahahayag si Jesus, ay hindi sa Dios: at ito ang sa anticristo, na inyong narinig na darating; at ngayo’y nasa sanglibutan na.

6 Tayo nga’y sa Dios: ang nakakakilala sa Dios ay dumirinig sa atin; ang hindi sa Dios ay hindi dumirinig sa atin. Dito’y ating nakikilala ang espiritu ng katotohanan, at ang espitiu ng kamalian.

Komentaryo: Si Soriano pala ang tatamaan dito e. Una, kasi itinuturo niya na si Kristo “ay PARANG tao, pero hindi talaga tao”. Yan ang maling katuruan ng mga Gnostico ng 1st-3rd century sa early Church. Kaya binabalaan ni San Juan na huwag padadala sa Gnostikong katuruan na si Kristo ay esparto lamang, di-nagkatawang-tao. Yun nga ang itinuturo ni Soriano! Kasi hindi nagbabasa ng history yan, gusto nya ang history ay mag-ayon sa kanya. Pwede ba yun?

Pangalawa, sa talatang 6, sabi ni San Juan, ang nakakilala sa Dios ay nakikinig sa ATIN. Sinong ATIN YAN? Yan ang mga unang Kristyano na kasama ng mga Apostoles at ng kanilang mga tagsunod century after century till the end of time. Aside from Titus, Timothy, Barnabas, Mark, who were the 2nd generation Christians after the Apostles, sinong mga 3rd generation Christians and all those after them? TOTAL BLACK OUT NA dito si Soriano at mga Protestante! Wala kasi silang Church history kasi bagong salta lang ang kanilang iglesia! Pero ito assignment ko sa inyo: basahin nyo mga standard references like encyclopedia and world history at alamin kung sino sila St. Ignatius of Antioch, St. Ireneus, St. Polycarp na direct disciple of John the Beloved, mga early Church Fathers. O medyo marami na yan, baka di kaya ng mga utak nyo at magka-LBM kayo, ako pa ang may kasalanan nyan. Pero for the sake of the truth naman yan e, at added pa sa ating kaalaman para sa ating kaligtasan, mga pare ko.

O sige na, dito lang muna tayo magpaalam, kasi magpahinga na muna ako. Pasalamat tayo sa Dios sa ating hero na si Ninoy, at walang classes ako ngayon, kaya mabigyan ko naman kayo ng time ko, especially mga taga-Dating Daan.

May God bless us all. In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Amen!

(Next na mga Paksa ko, abangan nyo, mga kaibigan).

2 Tim.3:16-17 – Ang lahat ng mga kasulatan na kinasihan ng Dios ay mapapakinabangan din naman sa pagtuturo, sa pagsansala, sa pagsaway, sa ikatututo na nasa katuwiran:

Upang ang mga tao ng Dios ay maging sakdal, tinuruang lubos sa lahat ng mga gawang mabuti.

Santiago 1:4 – At inyong pabayaan na ang pagtitits ay magkaroon ng sakdal na gawa, upang kayo’y maging sakdal at ganap, na walang anoman kakulangan.

1. Acts 20:28 – Jesus who is God bought the church. For INC, Christ is only man.

2. Acts 20:28–30 some (not all) will introduce heresies – that’s Manalo! Total apostasy is a heresy concocted by Manalo, Mormons, SDA and the Protestants

Examination of the claims of Anti-Catholic Churches

a. Examination of INC’s claim for Rom.16:16 & Acts 20:28
3. Churches, not church (iglesia)
4. Cristo, not Filipino (Kristo) but Spanish
5. Roman Christians are Catholics
6. 1st cent. Christians ang tinutukoy, not 20th cent. Christians na dito lang nagsimula sa Pilipinas noong 1914. Kahit ano pang twist ni Manalo sa talata ng Isaaiah 46:11 na "Far East" daw.
7. INC is not Church of Christ because Christ did not establish it, but the Church of Manalo as evidenced by the SEC
8. Church, nagtalikod/ apostasized & be erected by Manalo? Where in that verse & the entire Bible? Mt. 16:18 – the powers of hell shall not overcome it. It’s either Jesus or Manalo was telling lies. Since Jesus could not tell lies, then it is Manalo who is telling lies!
9. Acts 20:28 – flock of God, not just Church of God as its name
10. Acts 20:28 – bishops – who has bishops but the Catholic Churc

ANG PAGKAKAMALI NI SORIANO SA KAHULUGAN NG JEREMIAS 6:16

2009-09-16T18:42:00.000-07:00

ANG PAGKAKAMALI NI SORIANO
SA KAHULUGAN NG JEREMIAS 6:16
Sinulat ni: Bro. Rey V. Entila
CFD, DIOCESE OF BACOLOD
8/20/09

Jer.6:16 - Ganito ang sabi ng Panginoon, Magsitayo kayo sa mga daan at magsitingin kayo, at ipagtanong ninyo ang mga dating landas, kung saan nandoon ang mabuting daan; at magsilakad kayo roon, at kayo’y mangakakaasumpong nga kapahingahan sa inyong mga kaluluwa: nguni’t kanilang sinabi, Hindi kami magsilakad doon.

Kamangha-mangha na ang isang bagong litaw na sekta na “offshoot” lamang ng sektang itinatag ni Nicolas Perez noong 1936, ay matapang na kumuha ng talata sa Lumang Tipan at mag-claim na sila ang tinutukoy roon, ang dating daan! Whew! 1975 lang itinayo ang sekta ni Soriano, pinapalabas pa na sila ang DATING DAAN sa Lumang Tipan! Di ba maliwanag na hocus-pocus ito, mga kapatid?

Ang tinutukoy sa Jer.6:16 ay ang kasaysayan ng bayan ng Dios (Israel at Judah) at ang mga espiritwal na aral na makukuha roon. E, anong, relasyon ng sekta ni Soriano roon, na mahigit 2,500 taon na agwat sa kanila? No relation at all, but a figment of Eli’s imagination!

Sapagka’t ang Lumang Tipan ay nagkakaroon ng kaganapan sa Bagong Tipan, ang Judaismo ay napalitan at naging ganap sa Kristiyanismo, ang tunay na Daan ay si Hesus (Jn.14:6) at ang kanyang bagong sambayanan ay tinawag ring Daan (Gawa 9:22). Kaya ang DATING DAAN ay hindi na aplikable sa Bagong Testamento, kundi ang Bagong Daan na siyang walang kamatayang iglesiang itinatag ni Kristo mismo. Iyon, mga kapatid, ay HINDI ang Iglesia na itinatatag ni Nicolas Perez (1936), o ni Soriano (1975) o ni Manalo (1914), as common sense tells us. Iyon ay ang totoong iglesia ni Kristo (see Catechism of the Catholic Church par. 816 “the sole Church of Christ”) na laganap sa buong mundo (Catholic = universal)!

O, sige nga, mga miyembro ng Dating Daan, ibigay niyo ang lahat ng ebidensya nyo na sa Lumang Tipan, KAYO ang tinutukoy na DATING DAAN. Tell it to the marines, hehe, ika nga!

Lalo ring wala kayong ebidensiya sa Bagong Tipan, kasi Lumang Tipan ang ginamit niyo, e hindi pala kayo yun. Ngayon, lipat naman kayo sa Bagong Tipan? Palipat-lipat pala kayo, pabago-bago ang isip at doktrina, walang-katiyakan, haha. Depende sa andar ng utak ng inyong Founder kasi e, hindi ayon sa katotohanang di-nagbabago! Bagong Tipan na nga e na may bagong Daan - si Hesus at ang kanyang ITINAYONG iglesia - gawin nyo pang DATING daan. Lantaran na yatang kalokohan yan, pareng Eli. Pero, di lang masyadong halata ng iba – lalong-lalo na ng mga taga-Dating Daan. Sorry.

(end of article)

Mary the Mother of God

2009-09-11T01:11:00.000-07:00

Mary the Mother of God
Written by: Bro. Rey V. Entila
CFD - Diocese of Bacolod (Written: June 2005)

The Blessed Virgin Mary, by giving birth to Jesus Christ who is God the second Person of the Holy Trinity, is truly called the Mother of God.

I. The Teaching of the Church

“Called in the Gospels "the mother of Jesus", Mary is acclaimed by Elizabeth, at the prompting of the Spirit and even before the birth of her son, as "the mother of my Lord". In fact, the One whom she conceived as man by the Holy Spirit, who truly became her Son according to the flesh, was none other than the Father's eternal Son, the second person of the Holy Trinity. Hence the Church confesses that Mary is truly ‘Mother of God’ (Theotokos).” (CCC 495)

Council of Ephesus (431 AD)

"We confess, then, our Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, perfect God and perfect man, of a rational soul and a body, begotten before all ages from the Father in his Godhead, the same in the last days, for us and for our salvation, born of Mary the Virgin according to his humanity, one and the same consubstantial with the Father in Godhead and consubstantial with us in humanity, for a union of two natures took place. Therefore we confess one Christ, one Son, one Lord. According to this understanding of the unconfused union, we confess the holy Virgin to be the Mother of God because God the Word took flesh and became man and from his very conception united to himself the temple he took from her" (Formula of Union [A.D. 431]).

“Mary is truly "Mother of God" since she is the mother of the eternal Son of God made man, who is God himself”(CCC 509).

“The Virgin Mary "cooperated through free faith and obedience in human salvation" (Lumen Gentium 56). She uttered her yes "in the name of all human nature" (St. Thomas Aquinas, STh III, 30, 1). By her obedience she became the new Eve, mother of the living” (CCC 511).

II. Old Testament Prophecies

Right after the Fall of our First Parents, Adam and Eve, God delivered the first good news (protoevangelion) saying, “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" (Gen.3:15). There shall be enmity between Satan (the serpent) and the woman.

Since Eve has succumbed to the temptations of the devil, she is not the woman that will have enmity (war, deep opposition) with the serpent. That would be another woman (Mary) whose seed (Greek “spermatos”) will be against Satan’s seed. This is the one and only time in the whole of the Bible that the woman will have a seed, which is naturally applied to men. This even predicts the virginal conception of Jesus by the Virgin Mary. Finally, the woman’s seed shall crush the serpent’s (Satan’s) head. It will be the Promised Messiah and His mother, the woman, is Mary.

Another prophecy made some 700 years before the birth of Jesus, says, “Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign. Behold, a young woman shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.” (Isa.7:14) The young woman (Greek, parthenos; Hebrew, almah) who will give birth to the Immanuel (literally, “God with us”), is Mary. Therefore, Mary is the Mother of God. Although this verse may have been used by the Jews to refer to King Hezekiah of Judah, the New Testament writers who were inspired by the same Holy Spirit that inspired Old Testament writers, apply this to Jesus. This is the sensus plenior (full sense). The sign there became a miraculous sign because the woman was not just any young woman who was married to conceive a child, but a virgin mother. The son was not just an ordinary son, but the Son of God, whose virgin mother is Mary the Mother of God.

The third of the Old Testament prophecies that concerns about the mother and son relation is in Isaiah 9:5-6. “For to us a child is born, to us a son is given; and the government will be upon his shoulder, and his name will be called "Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace." That child is born of the Virgin Mary. Since that child is called the Mighty God and Mary is His mother, Mary is therefore the Mother of God.

III. New Testament Fulfillment

a. Synoptics

“And why is this granted me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?” (Lk 1:43). St. Elizabeth who was in verse 41, filled with the Holy Spirit, calls Mary the "mother of my Lord". The Lord (Gk. “Kyrios”) in the Septuagint or Greek version of the Old Testament refers to the “Lord your God” (Deut.6:4). Both Elizabeth and Luke the writer of the Gospel, were guided by the infallible Holy Spirit to proclaim Jesus as Lord or God. Therefore, Mary is the mother of God.

“Now the birth of Jesus Christ took place in this way. When his mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph, before they came together she was found to be with child of the Holy Spirit… ‘Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and his name shall be called Emmanuel’ (which means, God with us).” (Mt.1:18,23). The Old Testament prophecy is now accomplished through the virgin Mary who will bear a son called Emmanuel = "God is with us". The suffix “el” in Emmanuel in Hebrew means “God”. Its plural form, Elohim, found in Gen.1:1 signifies that God is not just one person (cf. Gen.1:26 – “let us”) but later revealed in the new Testament as a Trinity of Persons. It is the Second Person of the three Divine Persons that Mary was chosen to be the mother. Hence, she is called a divine mother, not that she is divine but that her son is Divine.

“And the angel said to her, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy, the Son of God. (Luke 1:35). The child born will be called holy, “the Son of God” . The definite article “the” signifies exclusiveness and uniqueness, whereas the “Son of God” proclaims that he has same nature (Gk. Homoousious) with God, but not the same person. Jesus is Son of God by eternal generation having been begotten, not made, not made by the Father from all eternity. Since Mary is declared to be the bearer of this eternal Son of God, then she is the Mother of God.

There are still several passages in the New Testament which prove the point under discussion, worthy of mentioning but need not be given further explanations. “…and going into the house they saw the child with Mary his mother, and they fell down and worshiped him. Then, opening their treasures, they offered him gifts, gold and frankincense and myrrh… Now when they had departed, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream and said, "Rise, take the child and his mother, and flee to Egypt, and remain there till I tell you; for Herod is about to search for the child, to destroy him" (Mt.2:11,13,20).

“While he was still speaking to the people, behold, his mother and his brethren stood outside, asking to speak to him.” (Mt.12:46) Again, “Is not this the carpenter's son? Is not his mother called Mary? And are not his brethren James and Joseph and Simon and Judas?” (Mt.13:55) Lastly, “And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus.” (Luke 1:31).

b. John the Evangelist

John who is both an apostle and evangelist describes the mother of Jesus as the “woman”.

“On the third day there was a marriage at Cana in Galilee, and the mother of Jesus was there” (Jn.2:1).

“When the wine failed, the mother of Jesus said to him, "They have no wine." And Jesus said to her, "O woman, what have you to do with me? My hour has not yet come" (Jn. 2: 3-4).

“When Jesus saw his mother, and the disciple whom he loved standing near, he said to his mother, "Woman, behold, your son!" (Jn. 19: 26).

c. St. Paul the Apostle

“But when the time had fully come, God sent forth his Son, born of a woman, born under the law” (Gal.4:4) Here St. Paul uses the word “woman” found in the protoevangelion or the first good news in Gen.3:15 “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." This word takes a mysterious meaning since the woman in this passage will have a son who will crush the serpent’s (satan’s) head. Since that Son is Jesus, Mary is the woman. St. John who was privileged to take care of the Blessed Mother after the death of Jesus on the Cross used this hallowed word “woman” in the beginning (ch.2) and end (ch.19) of his Gospel. “Woman” is found in the beginning (Gen.3:15) and end (Rev.12) of the whole Bible.

IV. Protestant Reformers on Mary as Mother of God

In this research on the Marian doctrines, the researcher also hopes to show from the writings of the Protestant Reformers in the 16th century the truth and facts that even these vehemently anti-Catholic writers did not consider Catholic Marian doctrines as unbiblical. This is contrary to the positions held by modern Protestants today, who in their theological chaos, even rejected what their forebears held dearly. This might be surprising to the eyes and ears of Evangelicals and Fundamentalists today, but it may just indicate that due to the lack of historical scholarship in favor of the “Bible alone” theory, they may have forgotten their doctrinal heritage of the 16th century.

First and foremost among the Protestant Reformers is their unwavering faith that Mary is the Mother of God. Below are the citations of their words and works.

a. Martin Luther

“In this work whereby she was made the Mother of God, so many and such good things were given her that no one can grasp them.... Not only was Mary the mother of Him who is born [in Bethlehem], but of Him who, before the world, was eternally born of the Father, from a Mother in time and at the same time man and God.” (Weimer, p. 572.)

b. John Calvin

“It cannot be denied that God in choosing and destining Mary to be the Mother of His Son, granted her the highest honor... Elizabeth calls Mary Mother of the Lord, because the unity of the person in the two natures of Christ was such that she could have said that the mortal man engendered in the womb of Mary was at the same time the eternal God” (Calvini Opera, p. 348, 35.)

c. Ulrich Zwingli

“It was given to her what belongs to no creature, that in the flesh she should bring forth the Son of God” (Zwingli, v. 6, 1, p. 639.).

IV. Modern day Fundamentalist Objections Against the title “Mother of God”

“As God, He (Jesus) had no beginning, and He was Mary’s Creator. As God, He cannot possibly have a mother. Mary cannot be the mother of God the Father, nor the mother of God the Holy Spirit. In the same way, she is not the mother of God the Son.” (Pezzotta, p. 137.)

However, the ex-Salesian priest-turned Baptist, Mr. Anthony Pezzotta, has committed grave heresy when he denied the Blessed Mother’s title Mother of God. First, he denied the clear Biblical teaching that the Word (Jesus) who is God became flesh and dwelt among us (Jn.1:1,14) with Mary as his mother (Jn.2:1-4). Since Jesus is God, and Mary was His chosen mother, therefore, Mary is the Mother of God. To deny that Jesus is God is to fall into the condemned Arian heresy of the fourth century. In the same way, to deny that Mary is the Mother of God is to commit the condemned heresy of Nestorius in the fifth century and leads to the heresy of Arius once again. Even Protestant Reformers proclaimed the Catholic belief concerning Mary as Mother of God. Therefore, while biblical, historical, logical and philosophical evidence points to the Catholic faith of the Divine Motherhood of Mary, nothing supports the heresy of Pezzotta.

V. The Testimony of the Early Church Fathers

The Church Fathers are the well-known Christian teachers of the early centuries of Christianity who upheld and defended the teachings of Christ which were passed down from generation to generation. Four characteristics are necessary for a person to be qualified as a Church Father: 1) Antiquity, 2) Orthodoxy, 3) Holiness, and 4) Approval of the Church. The last of the Church Fathers of the West is St. Isidore of Seville (560-636). In the East, it is St. John Damascene (675-749). These Church Fathers were the witnesses of the true Apostolic Tradition that closely guarded the pure deposit of the Christian faith. To deny their authority and orthodoxy is tantamount to the denial of the constant guidance of Christ and the Holy Spirit to His established Church which was tasked to continue the saving mission of Christ. The following are the quotations from the early Church Fathers on Mary as the Mother of God.

a. Irenaeus. "The Virgin Mary, being obedient to his word, received from an angel the glad tidings that she would bear God" (Against Heresies, 5:19:1 [A.D. 189]).

b. Athanasius. "The Word begotten of the Father from on high, inexpressibly, inexplicably, incomprehensibly, and eternally, is he that is born in time here below of the Virgin Mary, the Mother of God" (The Incarnation of the Word of God 8 [A.D. 365]).

c. Jerome. "As to how a virgin became the Mother of God, he [Rufinus] has full knowledge; as to how he himself was born, he knows nothing" (Against Rufinus 2:10 [A.D. 401]).

"Do not marvel at the novelty of the thing, if a Virgin gives birth to God" (Commentaries on Isaiah 3:7:15 [A.D. 409]).

d. Cyril of Alexandria. "I have been amazed that some are utterly in doubt as to whether or not the holy Virgin is able to be called the Mother of God. For if our Lord Jesus Christ is God, how should the holy Virgin who bore him not be the Mother of God?" (Letter to the Monks of Egypt 1 [A.D. 427]).

"If anyone will not confess that the Emmanuel is very God, and that therefore the holy Virgin is the Mother of God, inasmuch as in the flesh she bore the Word of God made flesh [John 1:14]: let him be anathema" (ibid.).

e. Vincent of Lerins. "Nestorius, whose disease is of an opposite kind, while pretending that he holds two distinct substances in Christ, brings in of a sudden two persons, and with unheard-of wickedness would have two sons of God, two Christs,—one, God, the other, man; one, begotten of his Father, the other, born of his mother. For which reason he maintains that Saint Mary ought to be called, not the Mother of God, but the Mother of Christ" (The Notebooks 12[35] [A.D. 434]).

The following excerpts are from the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the authoritative and magisterial document that proclaims the unchanging truth about the Blessed Mother, her relationship to Jesus as well as to the Church which is His body (Col.1:18).

“Since the Virgin Mary's role in the mystery of Christ and the Spirit has been treated, it is fitting now to consider her place in the mystery of the Church. "The Virgin Mary . . . is acknowledged and honored as being truly the Mother of God and of the redeemer. . . . She is 'clearly the mother of the members of Christ' . . . since she has by her charity joined in bringing about the birth of believers in the Church, who are members of its head." "Mary, Mother of Christ, Mother of the Church" (CCC 963).

“Mary's role in the Church is inseparable from her union with Christ and flows directly from it. "This union of the mother with the Son in the work of salvation is made manifest from the time of Christ's virginal conception up to his death"; it is made manifest above all at the hour of his Passion:
Thus the Blessed Virgin advanced in her pilgrimage of faith, and faithfully persevered in her union with her Son unto the cross. There she stood, in keeping with the divine plan, enduring with her only begotten Son the intensity of his suffering, joining herself with his sacrifice in her mother's heart, and lovingly consenting to the immolation of this victim, born of her: to be given, by the same Christ Jesus dying on the cross, as a mother to his disciple, with these words: "Woman, behold your son" (CCC 964).

“After her Son's Ascension, Mary "aided the beginnings of the Church by her prayers." In her association with the apostles and several women, "we also see Mary by her prayers imploring the gift of the Spirit, who had already overshadowed her in the Annunciation"(CCC 965).

Mary’s Perpetual Virginity

2009-09-11T01:08:00.000-07:00

Mary’s Perpetual Virginity
Written by: Bro. Rey V. Entila
CFD - diocese of Bacolod (written: June 2005)

Perpetual Virginity. Perpetual, from the Latin “perpetuus”, meaning continuous, and Virginity, from the Latin “virgo” which means maiden, virgin. The Blessed Virgin Mary was a perpetual virgin before, during, and after the birth of Jesus. Her virginity is both physical and moral.

The virginity of Mary includes “mental virginity”, which is a constant virginal disposition, “sensual virginity”, which is freedom from sexual desires, and lastly, “physical virginity”, which is physical integrity. The doctrine of the Church refers primarily to her bodily integrity.

1. Virginity before the birth
Mary conceived by the Holy Ghost without the cooperation of man.

2. Virginity During the Birth of Jesus
Mary bore her Son without any violation of her virginal integrity.

3. Virginity After the Birth of Jesus
Also after the birth of Jesus Mary remained ever a virgin.

I. The Teaching of the Church

Mary's Virginity

“From the first formulations of her faith, the Church has confessed that Jesus was conceived solely by the power of the Holy Spirit in the womb of the Virgin Mary, affirming also the corporeal aspect of this event: Jesus was conceived "by the Holy Spirit without human seed". The Fathers see in the virginal conception the sign that it truly was the Son of God who came in a humanity like our own” (CCC 496).

Mary - "ever-virgin"

“The deepening of faith in the virginal motherhood led the Church to confess Mary's real and perpetual virginity even in the act of giving birth to the Son of God made man. In fact, Christ's birth "did not diminish his mother's virginal integrity but sanctified it." And so the liturgy of the Church celebrates Mary as Aeiparthenos, the "Ever-virgin" (CCC 499).

“Against this doctrine the objection is sometimes raised that the Bible mentions brothers and sisters of Jesus. The Church has always understood these passages as not referring to other children of the Virgin Mary. In fact James and Joseph, ‘brothers of Jesus’, are the sons of another Mary, a disciple of Christ, whom St. Matthew significantly calls ‘the other Mary’. They are close relations of Jesus, according to an Old Testament expression” (CCC 500).

“Mary ‘remained a virgin in conceiving her Son, a virgin in giving birth to him, a virgin in carrying him, a virgin in nursing him at her breast, always a virgin’ (St. Augustine, Serm. 186, 1: PL 38, 999): with her whole being she is ‘the handmaid of the Lord’" (Lk 1:38 (CCC510).

Council of Constantinople II

"If anyone will not confess that the Word of God ... came down from the heavens and was made flesh of holy and glorious Mary, mother of God and ever-virgin, and was born from her, let him be anathema" (Anathemas Against the "Three Chapters" 2 [A.D. 553]).

II. Old Testament Prophecies

Seven hundred years before the birth of the Messiah, the prophet Isaiah prophesied to the distressed people of Israel, “Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign. Behold, a young woman shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel. (Isa.7:14) Although the Jews interpreted this verse for the birth of their ideal king in the person of King Hezekiah, and the young unmarried woman (Heb. almah), the New Testament Church applied this prophecy perfectly to Jesus Christ who is perfect king and Messiah who was miraculously born of a pure virgin without the seed of a man. The virgin shall give birth to “a son” and not “sons”.

Since the time of the early Church Fathers, the words of the Prophet Ezekiel were applied to Mary giving birth to only one child. – “And he said to me, ‘This gate shall remain shut; it shall not be opened, and no one shall enter by it; for the LORD, the God of Israel, has entered by it; therefore it shall remain shut”(Ezek. 44:2).

Jesus is predicted as both only child and firstborn. “And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of compassion and supplication, so that, when they look on him whom they have pierced, they shall mourn for him, as one mourns for an only child, and weep bitterly over him, as one weeps over a first-born” (Zec 12:10).

III. New Testament Fulfillment

a. Synoptics

The synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark and Luke) explicitly tell us that the conception and birth of Jesus happened through the supernatural intervention of God in human affairs. Mary was a virgin engaged to Joseph, but before they lived together as husband and wife, the angel Gabriel announced to Mary that she will conceive a child, not in the human and natural way, but by the power of the Holy Spirit. That’s why, “Mary said to the angel, "How shall this be, since I have no husband?" (Lk 1:34).

In the incident of the finding of Jesus in the temple, there was no mention that there were other younger brothers and sisters of Jesus by Mary and Joseph. Jesus could have been reprimanded for not going home in order to care for his brothers and sisters, being a responsible eldest son. But nowhere does the Bible mention this (Lk.2:41-51).

“Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary and brother of James and Joses and Judas and Simon, and are not his sisters here with us?" And they took offense at him” (Mk.6:3) This is the verse most often used by the Fundamentalists to “prove” that Mary is not a perpetual virgin. First, Jesus is called “the son”, not a son or one of the sons of Mary, meaning he is the only son of Mary. Second, the word “brother” in the Jewish context refers not only to being siblings under same father and mother, but also to cousins, relatives, tribesmen and fellow Israelites; therefore, one cannot make a definite conclusion that the “brothers” here means Jesus’ brothers born of Mary. Third, if the Jews would mean without a doubt that they are his real blood brothers, then the expression should be “sons of Mary” which is not used for them. Fourth, James and Joses/Joseph have another Mary as their own mother, “among whom were Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James and Joseph, and the mother of the sons of Zebedee” (Mt.27:56); “Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Joses saw where he was laid” (Mark 15:47); she is oftentimes called in the Gospels as “the other Mary”: “Mary Magdalene and the other Mary were there, sitting opposite the sepulchre… Now after the sabbath, toward the dawn of the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to see the sepulchre” (Matt. 27:61; 28:1).

“Philip and Bartholomew; Thomas and Matthew the tax collector; James the son of Alphaeus, and Thaddaeus.” Matt. 10:3. The three James related to Jesus are the following: James the Greater, whose brother is John, is the son of Zebedee and his mother is Mary Salome. James the Less, whose brothers are Joses and Jude, has Cleophas/Alpheus as his father and “other Mary”, the relative of Virgin Mary. The last James is mentioned in Acts 15 and Gal.2 and the writer of the Epistle of James. He is the relative of Jesus. All these three James were never mentioned as sons of Jesus’ mother Mary.

The Genealogy of the Brethren

Parents Siblings Biblical Texts
Zebedee and Salome or Mary Salome James the Greater and John the Beloved (Boanerges = Sons of thunder) Mt 10:2; Mk 1:19; Mk 3:17;
Mt.27:56; Mk.15:40;

Cleophas (Gk.)/Alpheus or Halpai (Heb.) and Mary (or the other Mary) the sister (cousin/relative) of Virgin Mary James, Joses and Jude Mt.10:3; Mt. 27:56,61; Mt 28:1; Jn.19:25; Lk 6;16; Acts 1:13 Holy Spirit (overshadowed Virgin Mary) and Virgin Mary the mother of Jesus Jesus Christ Isa 7:14; Zech 12:10;

“And when his family heard it, they went out to seize him, for people were saying, "He is beside himself" (Mark 3:21). Jesus’ extended family wanted to seize Jesus out of public dismay. If Jesus were the firstborn son in their family, they could not have acted in that disrespectful manner.

b. John

“So the soldiers did this. But standing by the cross of Jesus were his mother, and his mother's sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene. When Jesus saw his mother, and the disciple whom he loved standing near, he said to his mother, "Woman, behold, your son!" Then he said to the disciple, "Behold, your mother!" And from that hour the disciple took her to his own home.” (Jn.19:25-27)

“For no man works in secret if he seeks to be known openly. If you do these things, show yourself to the world." For even his brothers did not believe in him. Jesus said to them, "My time has not yet come, but your time is always here. The world cannot hate you, but it hates me because I testify of it that its works are evil.” (Jn.7:3-4)

IV. Protestant Reformers on the Perpetual Virginity of Mary

Martin Luther: “It is an article of faith that Mary is Mother of the Lord and still a virgin. Christ, we believe, came forth from a womb left perfectly intact.” (Works of Luther, v. II, pp. 319-320; v. 6, p. 510.)

John Calvin: "Helvidius has shown himself too ignorant, in saying that Mary had several sons, because mention is made in some passages of the brothers of Christ" (Calvin, Opera).

“There have been certain folk who have wished to suggest from this passage [Matt 1:25] that the Virgin Mary had other children than the Son of God, and that Joseph had then dwelt with her later; but what folly this is! For the gospel writer did not wish to record what happened afterwards; he simply wished to make clear Joseph's obedience and to show also that Joseph had been well and truly assured that it was God who had sent His angel to Mary. He had therefore never dwelt with her nor had he shared her company.... And besides this Our Lord Jesus Christ is called the first-born. This is not because there was a second or a third, but because the gospel writer is paying regard to the precedence. Scripture speaks thus of naming the first-born whether or not there was any question of the second.” (Sermon on Matthew 1:22-25, published 1562.)

Huldrich Zwingli: “I firmly believe that Mary, according to the words of the gospel as a pure Virgin brought forth for us the Son of God and in childbirth and after childbirth forever remained a pure, intact Virgin” (Zwingli Opera, v. 1, p. 424.).

Mary’s perpetual virginity was defended by Zwingli by referring to Exodus 4:22.

V. Modern-day Fundamentalist Objections Against the Doctrine of Perpetual Virginity

“…Mary had other children after Jesus. For one thing, “brothers’ and “sisters” are mentioned in the context of the family with the “carpenter’s son” and “mother,” which clearly indicates they are immediate blood bothers. For another, the Greek term for “brother” (adelphos) here is the normal word for “blood brother.” In fact, there is no single example where adelphos is used for “cousin” in the New Testament. There is a word for “cousin” (anepsios), as in Colosians 4:10, where Mark is described as “the cousin (anepsios) of Barnabas.” (Roman Catholics and Evangelicals: Agreements and Differences, P.303.)

The objection above can be answered that to prove that adelphos in the New Testament is also used for persons not related by blood is quite easy. Romans 8:29 says, “For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the first-born among many brethren (adelphos).” Here, St. Paul refers to Christ as the prominent one among the brothers, not in the physical sense, but in the spiritual sense.

The paragraphs below will further clarify the Biblical words that have been the cause of much confusion in the Fundamentalists’ groups today.

a. "Brothers" of Jesus

The word “brother” in Hebrew is ‘AH. Unlike the Greeks who utilize a variety of words for cousins and relatives, the Jews who are ever mindful of their common ancestry, call their close and distant relatives (Gk. “sungenis”) as ‘AH (brother). To read therefore from the New Testament that Jesus had brothers and sisters and conclude that they were his siblings in the same mother and father, is a hasty generalization. The earliest disciples who were Jews merely translated the Hebrew ‘AH to a general Greek term for brother.

Even in the Old Testament, Abraham called Lot ‘AH although Lot was Abraham's nephew (Gk. "anepsios") / Gen. 13:8; 14:14,16. (see also other references for the word brother which did not really mean strictly sons coming from the same mother. Gen. 29:15; Deut. 23:7; 1 Chron. 15:5-18; Jer. 34:9; Neh. 5:7 -"brethren" means kinsmen). Hebrew and Aramaic have no word for "cousin." (2 Sam. 1:26; 1 Kings 9:13, 20:32 - 2 Kings 10:13-14 - King Ahaziah's 42 "brethren" were really his kinsmen).
The real question is, if Jesus had brothers and sisters from Mary and Joseph, why did the Gospels not mention as close to the persecuted and dying Jesus on the way to Calvary? Or, if they were there, why did they not assert their legal right to claim Mary for their care when Jesus gave His mother Mary to his beloved disciple? The fact is, Jesus who cared for the Virgin Mary after the death of St. Joseph, hang suspended and dying on the Cross. With no sibling to care for His widowed mother, He entrusted her to John. This is the Catholic exegesis that perfectly fits the Gospel accounts, as opposed to modern-day Fundamentalists’ weak assumptions.

b. Lk.2:7 “Firstborn” (She gave birth to her firstborn son)

The next word that stirs the minds of many “Bible Christians” today is the word “firstborn”. Immediately it is erroneously concluded that there must be second born or third born or a dozen after the firstborn. But this is not correct biblical interpretation. The word “firstborn” is applied to the first male child who opens the womb of the mother, regardless whether there are other siblings afterwards or not. “Firstborn” is a technical term since one who has that title is given the privilege to receive the material and spiritual blessings of the family. The female child, although may be first in the order of siblings is never considered the firstborn.

"Consecrate to me all the first-born; whatever is the first to open the womb among the people of Israel, both of man and of beast, is mine" (Ex.13:2).

"Behold, I have taken the Levites from among the people of Israel instead of every first-born that opens the womb among the people of Israel. The Levites shall be mine” (Nb.3:12).

”The firstling of an ass you shall redeem with a lamb, or if you will not redeem it you shall break its neck. All the first-born of your sons you shall redeem. And none shall appear before me empty” (Ex 34:20).

c. Matthew 1:25 (Joseph did not know her "until")

Another word that has confused the minds of the Fundamentalists for a century now, is the word “until” in Matthew 1:25. This is a theological novelty which even the original Protestant fathers never ventured to deny the Blessed Mary’s perpetual virginity. This is again another case of theological bias in order to discredit the Catholic Church’s belief.

The American Heritage Dictionary (1982) gives the meaning of the word “until” – prep. 1. up to the time of 2. before a specified time; conj. 1. Up to the time that 2. before 3. To the point or extent that.

To conclude that the phrase “Joseph did not know her until” means Joseph had sexual relations with Mary after she gave birth to Jesus, is to do violence to the meaning of that word. In that case, the word “until” can also mean that immediately or few days after her giving birth, Joseph had relations with her, to which one may object that it is too much violence to that word. Well, that absurdity happens when one reads the Bible and interprets it by his own little learning and not according to the proper biblical context.

The following verses show the many occurrences of “until” wherein nothing happened to the contrary after it, as oppositionists assert.

”And behold, I am with you always, until the end of the age" (Mt.28:20, NAB); “Till I come, attend to the public reading of scripture, to preaching, to teaching” (1Tim.4:13).

“For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet” (1Cor.15:25); “And the child grew and became strong in spirit, and he was in the wilderness till the day of his manifestation to Israel” (Lk 1:80). “And as a widow till she was eighty-four. She did not depart from the temple, worshiping with fasting and prayer night and day”(Luke 2:37).

“The Lord said to my Lord, Sit at my right hand, till I make thy enemies a stool for thy feet.' (Luke 20:42-43); “and sent forth a raven; and it went to and fro until the waters were dried up from the earth” (Gen. 8:7).

“Behold, I am with you and will keep you wherever you go, and will bring you back to this land; for I will not leave you until I have done that of which I have spoken to you" (Gen. 28:15); “And he buried him in the valley in the land of Moab opposite Beth-peor; but no man knows the place of his burial to this day” (Deut. 34:6).

“And Michal the daughter of Saul had no child to the day of her death” (2 Sam. 6:23); “So they went up to Mount Zion with gladness and joy, and offered burnt offerings, because not one of them had fallen before they returned in safety” (1 Macc. 5:54).

Given the more than a dozen examples above, one can shatter one’s deeply-held bias and replace it with a scholarly viewpoint which considers the totality of the biblical data. That data shows and proves again and again for 2000 years already the Holy Spirit’s constant and infallible guidance of the Church’s faith in the perpetual virginity of the Most Blessed Virgin Mary.
VI. The Testimony of the Early Church Fathers

Protoevangelion of James (120 AD). "And behold, an angel of the Lord stood by [St. Anne], saying, ‘Anne! Anne! The Lord has heard your prayer, and you shall conceive and shall bring forth, and your seed shall be spoken of in all the world.’ And Anne said, ‘As the Lord my God lives, if I beget either male or female, I will bring it as a gift to the Lord my God, and it shall minister to him in the holy things all the days of its life.’ . . . And [from the time she was three] Mary was in the temple of the Lord as if she were a dove that dwelt there" (Protoevangelium of James 4, 7).

"And when she was twelve years old there was held a council of priests, saying, ‘Behold, Mary has reached the age of twelve years in the temple of the Lord. What then shall we do with her, lest perchance she defile the sanctuary of the Lord?’ And they said to the high priest, ‘You stand by the altar of the Lord; go in and pray concerning her, and whatever the Lord shall manifest to you, that also will we do.’ . . . [A]nd he prayed concerning her, and behold, an angel of the Lord stood by him saying, ‘Zechariah! Zechariah! Go out and assemble the widowers of the people and let them bring each his rod, and to whomsoever the Lord shall show a sign, his wife shall she be. . . . And Joseph [was chosen]. . . . And the priest said to Joseph, ‘You have been chosen by lot to take into your keeping the Virgin of the Lord.’ But Joseph refused, saying, ‘I have children, and I am an old man, and she is a young girl’".

"And Annas the scribe came to him [Joseph] . . . and saw that Mary was with child. And he ran away to the priest and said to him, ‘Joseph, whom you did vouch for, has committed a grievous crime.’ And the priest said, ‘How so?’ And he said, ‘He has defiled the virgin whom he received out of the temple of the Lord and has married her by stealth’".

"And the priest said, ‘Mary, why have you done this? And why have you brought your soul low and forgotten the Lord your God?’ . . . And she wept bitterly saying, ‘As the Lord my God lives, I am pure before him, and know not man’".

Origen. "The Book [the Protoevangelium] of James [records] that the brethren of Jesus were sons of Joseph by a former wife, whom he married before Mary. Now those who say so wish to preserve the honor of Mary in virginity to the end, so that body of hers which was appointed to minister to the Word . . . might not know intercourse with a man after the Holy Spirit came into her and the power from on high overshadowed her. And I think it in harmony with reason that Jesus was the firstfruit among men of the purity which consists in [perpetual] chastity, and Mary was among women. For it were not pious to ascribe to any other than to her the firstfruit of virginity" (Commentary on Matthew 2:17 [A.D. 248]).

Hilary of Poitiers. "If they [the brethren of the Lord] had been Mary’s sons and not those taken from Joseph’s former marriage, she would never have been given over in the moment of the passion [crucifixion] to the apostle John as his mother, the Lord saying to each, ‘Woman, behold your son,’ and to John, ‘Behold your mother’ [John 19:26–27), as he bequeathed filial love to a disciple as a consolation to the one desolate" (Commentary on Matthew 1:4 [A.D. 354]).

Athanasius. "Let those, therefore, who deny that the Son is by nature from the Father and proper to his essence deny also that he took true human flesh from the ever-virgin Mary" (Discourses Against the Arians 2:70 [A.D. 360]).

Jerome. "[Helvidius] produces Tertullian as a witness [to his view] and quotes Victorinus, bishop of Petavium. Of Tertullian, I say no more than that he did not belong to the Church. But as regards Victorinus, I assert what has already been proven from the gospel—that he [Victorinus] spoke of the brethren of the Lord not as being sons of Mary but brethren in the sense I have explained, that is to say, brethren in point of kinship, not by nature. [By discussing such things we] are . . . following the tiny streams of opinion. Might I not array against you the whole series of ancient writers? Ignatius, Polycarp, Irenaeus, Justin Martyr, and many other apostolic and eloquent men, who against [the heretics] Ebion, Theodotus of Byzantium, and Valentinus, held these same views and wrote volumes replete with wisdom. If you had ever read what they wrote, you would be a wiser man" (Against Helvidius: The Perpetual Virginity of Mary 19 [A.D. 383]).

"We believe that God was born of a virgin, because we read it. We do not believe that Mary was married after she brought forth her Son, because we do not read it. . . . You [Helvidius] say that Mary did not remain a virgin. As for myself, I claim that Joseph himself was a virgin, through Mary, so that a virgin Son might be born of a virginal wedlock" (ibid., ).

Ambrose of Milan. "Imitate her [Mary], holy mothers, who in her only dearly beloved Son set forth so great an example of material virtue; for neither have you sweeter children [than Jesus], nor did the Virgin seek the consolation of being able to bear another son" (Letters 63:111 [A.D. 388]).

Pope Siricius I. "You had good reason to be horrified at the thought that another birth might issue from the same virginal womb from which Christ was born according to the flesh. For the Lord Jesus would never have chosen to be born of a virgin if he had ever judged that she would be so incontinent as to contaminate with the seed of human intercourse the birthplace of the Lord’s body, that court of the eternal king" (Letter to Bishop Anysius [A.D. 392]).

Augustine. "In being born of a Virgin who chose to remain a Virgin even before she knew who was to be born of her, Christ wanted to approve virginity rather than to impose it. And he wanted virginity to be of free choice even in that woman in whom he took upon himself the form of a slave" (Holy Virginity 4:4 [A.D. 401]).

"It was not the visible sun, but its invisible Creator who consecrated this day for us, when the Virgin Mother, fertile of womb and integral in her virginity, brought him forth, made visible for us, by whom, when he was invisible, she too was created. A Virgin conceiving, a Virgin bearing, a Virgin pregnant, a Virgin bringing forth, a Virgin perpetual. Why do you wonder at this, O man?" (Sermons 186:1 [A.D. 411]).

"Heretics called Antidicomarites are those who contradict the perpetual virginity of Mary and affirm that after Christ was born she was joined as one with her husband" (Heresies 56 [A.D. 428]).

Cyril of Alexandria. "[T]he Word himself, coming into the Blessed Virgin herself, assumed for himself his own temple from the substance of the Virgin and came forth from her a man in all that could be externally discerned, while interiorly he was true God. Therefore he kept his Mother a virgin even after her childbearing" (Against Those Who Do Not Wish to Confess That the Holy Virgin is the Mother of God 4 [A.D. 430]).

Pope Leo I. "His [Christ’s] origin is different, but his [human] nature is the same. Human usage and custom were lacking, but by divine power a Virgin conceived, a Virgin bore, and Virgin she remained" (Sermons 22:2 [A.D. 450]).

Mary’s Cooperation in the Work of Redemption

2009-09-11T01:02:00.000-07:00

Mary’s Cooperation in the Work of Redemption
Written by: Bro. Rey V. Entila
CFD - Diocese of Bacolod (Written: June 2005)

Mary as Mediatrix. “A title of the Blessed Virgin as mediator of grace. There are two aspects of this mediation. It is certain in Catholic theology that, since Mary gave birth to the Redeemer, who is the source of all grace, she is in this way the channel of all graces to mankind…On the second stage of mediation, Mary cooperates by her maternal intercession in applying Christ’s redemptive grace to human beings, called the subjective redemption.” (Hardon, pp. 254-255).

I. The Teaching of the Church

“Her role in relation to the Church and to all humanity goes still further. "In a wholly singular way she cooperated by her obedience, faith, hope, and burning charity in the Savior's work of restoring supernatural life to souls. For this reason she is a mother to us in the order of grace" (CCC 968).

"This motherhood of Mary in the order of grace continues uninterruptedly from the consent which she loyally gave at the Annunciation and which she sustained without wavering beneath the cross, until the eternal fulfillment of all the elect. Taken up to heaven she did not lay aside this saving office but by her manifold intercession continues to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation . . . . Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked in the Church under the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix" (CCC 969).

"Mary's function as mother of men in no way obscures or diminishes this unique mediation of Christ, but rather shows its power. But the Blessed Virgin's salutary influence on men . . . flows forth from the superabundance of the merits of Christ, rests on his mediation, depends entirely on it, and draws all its power from it." "No creature could ever be counted along with the Incarnate Word and Redeemer; but just as the priesthood of Christ is shared in various ways both by his ministers and the faithful, and as the one goodness of God is radiated in different ways among his creatures, so also the unique mediation of the Redeemer does not exclude but rather gives rise to a manifold cooperation which is but a sharing in this one source" (CCC 970).

Wholly united with her Son

“Mary's role in the Church is inseparable from her union with Christ and flows directly from it. "This union of the mother with the Son in the work of salvation is made manifest from the time of Christ's virginal conception up to his death"; it is made manifest above all at the hour of his Passion:

Thus the Blessed Virgin advanced in her pilgrimage of faith, and faithfully persevered in her union with her Son unto the cross. There she stood, in keeping with the divine plan, enduring with her only begotten Son the intensity of his suffering, joining herself with his sacrifice in her mother's heart, and lovingly consenting to the immolation of this victim, born of her: to be given, by the same Christ Jesus dying on the cross, as a mother to his disciple, with these words: "Woman, behold your son”(CCC 964).

After her Son's Ascension, Mary "aided the beginnings of the Church by her prayers." In her association with the apostles and several women, "we also see Mary by her prayers imploring the gift of the Spirit, who had already overshadowed her in the Annunciation" (CCC 965).

“By pronouncing her ‘fiat’ at the Annunciation and giving her consent to the Incarnation, Mary was already collaborating with the whole work her Son was to accomplish. She is mother wherever he is Savior and head of the Mystical Body” (CCC 973).

II. Old Testament Prefigurement

Abraham and Moses: Mediators of the Covenant

In the Old Testament, God used human beings to be mediators of his covenant of salvation for His people. Even though God is the sole Savior, “It is I, I the Lord; there is no savior but me” (Isa. 43:11), yet He willed to make people participate in that salvation. In the New Testament, even though Jesus is the sole Mediator of God’s salvation (1 Tim.2:5), yet the Christians also participate in that work of mediation or intercession (1Tim.2:1-3). The passage below show how Abraham mediated for the people of Sodom and Gomorrah and how God heard him. Yet, since the required number of ten righteous people that Abraham asked from God was not reached, these cities were destroyed nonetheless.

"Abraham stood yet before the Lord. And Abraham drew near, and said, Wilt thou also destroy the righteous with the wicked? Peradventure there be fifty righteous within the city: wilt thou also destroy and not spare the place for the fifty righteous that are therein? ... And the Lord said, If I find in Sodom fifty righteous within the city, then I will spare all the place for their sakes" (Genesis 18:22-24, 26).

Just as Abraham mediated, for the sake of the salvation of many people, Moses also interceded and pleaded for the salvation of the Israelites for their sins.

"Moses said unto the people, Ye have sinned a great sin: and now I will go up unto the Lord; peradventure I shall make an atonement for your sin. And Moses returned unto the Lord, and said, Oh, this people have sinned a great sin, and have made them gods of gold. Yet now, if thou wilt forgive their sin -; and if not, blot me, I pray thee, out of thy book which thou has written" (Exodus 32:30-32).
III. New Testament Fulfillment

Mary is the Mediatrix of all graces by her cooperation in the Incarnation (Universal Mediation).

“But when the time had fully come, God sent forth his Son, born of woman, born under the law” (Gal.4:4). In this passage, Mary cooperates in giving birth to the Savior of the world.

Mary is the Mediatrix of all graces by her intercession in Heaven (Special Mediation).

During the wedding at Cana, Jesus’ mother was there and through her intercession Jesus performed the first miracle; thus, began His public ministry. “When the wine failed, the mother of Jesus said to him, "They have no wine." And Jesus said to her, "O woman, what have you to do with me? My hour has not yet come." His mother said to the servants, "Do whatever he tells you" (Jn.2:3–5).

In the Book of Acts of the Apostles, Mary is specially mentioned as praying together with the gathered disciples. “All these with one accord devoted themselves to prayer, together with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brothers” (Acts 1:14).

Mediation of Saints

All baptized Christians are called saints in the New Testament (Eph.1:1;Phil.1:1; Col.1:1), meaning, they have been separated and consecrated by God among all people to glorify Him. While Christ is the sole Mediator between God and man (1 Tim.2:5) as Savior of the world, Christians who are united with Christ in baptism (Gal.3:14), participate in this mediation and intercession. St. Paul wrote to the Christians asking that “that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all men, for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life, godly and respectful in every way. This is good, and it is acceptable in the sight of God our Savior” (1 Tim.2:1-3).

The following passages show that fellow Christians are allowed by God to be mediators of the salvation brought about by Christ, but in such a way that does not undermine Christ’s Mediatorship. "I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I complete what is lacking in Christ's afflictions for the sake of his body, that is the Church" (Colossians 1:24).

"For we are laborers together with God" (1 Corinthians 3:9). "Let him know, that he which converteth the sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death, and shall hide a multitude of sins” (James 5:20). "Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee" (1 Timothy 4:16).

“But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God's own people, that you may declare the wonderful deeds of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light” (1 Pet. 2:9). We Christians participate in the universal priesthood which primary function is to offer sacrifices in behalf of the people of God.

“Therefore confess your sins to one another, and pray for one another, that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous man has great power in its effects” (James 5:16). While any Christian can mediate or intercede for another, the prayer or intercession of the righteous person is powerful. This is the whole rationale of the Apostolic Tradition that Virgin Mary, foremost of all saints, is sought for her powerful maternal intercession for all.

Two passages in the Book of Revelation show that saints and martyrs who are now in heaven constantly pray for us Christians here on earth. First, “And when he had taken the scroll, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, each holding a harp, and with golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints; and they sang a new song, saying, "Worthy art thou to take the scroll and to open its seals, for thou wast slain and by thy blood didst ransom men for God from every tribe and tongue and people and nation” (Rev.5:8-9). Another one is, “And another angel came and stood at the altar with a golden censer; and he was given much incense to mingle with the prayers of all the saints upon the golden altar before the throne” (Rev.8:3).

Fundamentalist Erroneous View: Jesus "rebuking" Mary

There are some verses in the New Testament that seem to appear to Bible Christians that Jesus was rebuking Mary. However, in the light of proper Biblical exegesis or interpretation, in these verses Jesus truly exalted His beloved mother. It is only when the anti-Marian theological lens is taken away, like scales that fell off from the anti-Christian Saul’s eyes, will a person truly see that looking down on Mary is actually downgrading God who made her His masterpiece of all creation.

The following passage is thrice mentioned in the Gospels. “But he replied to the man who told him, "Who is my mother, and who are my brethren?" And stretching out his hand toward his disciples, he said, "Here are my mother and my brethren! For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother, and sister, and mother" (Matt. 12:48-50). Mark also gives the parallel passage, “And he replied, "Who are my mother and my brethren?" And looking around on those who sat about him, he said, "Here are my mother and my brethren! Whoever does the will of God is my brother, and sister, and mother" (Mark 3:33-35). Luke renders it, “And he was told, "Your mother and your brethren are standing outside, desiring to see you." But he said to them, "My mother and my brethren are those who hear the word of God and do it" (Luke 8:20-21).

The context shows that Virgin Mary enjoys a double mother hood to Jesus: physically because she gave birth to Him, and, spiritually because she does the will of the Father perfectly more than anyone else. The same interpretation applies to this next passage. “As he said this, a woman in the crowd raised her voice and said to him, "Blessed is the womb that bore you, and the breasts that you sucked!" But he said, "Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and keep it!" (Luke 11:27-28).

“And Jesus said to her, "O woman, what have you to do with me? My hour has not yet come" (John 2:4). “When Jesus saw his mother, and the disciple whom he loved standing near, he said to his mother, "Woman, behold, your son!" (John 19:26). These citations may seem repugnant to Filipino ears to call one’s dear mother as “woman” (Greek, “gune”). Even the standard Protestant reference book has this to say: “Gune” – in the vocative case, used in addressing as woman, it is a term not of reproof or severity, but of endearment or respect, Matt.15;28; Jn.2:4, where the Lord’s words to His mother at the wedding in Cana, are neither rebuff nor rebuke. The question is, literally, ‘What to me and to thee?’ and the word “woman”, the term of endearment, follows this. The meaning is, ‘There is no obligation on Me or you, but love will supply the need.’ She confides in Him, He responds to her faith. There was lovingkindness in both hearts. His next words about’ His hour’ suit this; they were not unfamiliar to her. Cana is the path to Calvary; Calvary was not yet, but it made the beginning signs possible” (Vine, p.1239).

“When he saw Jesus, he cried out and fell down before him, and said with a loud voice, "What have you to do with me, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? I beseech you, do not torment me" (Luke 8:28). The demons actually were not rebuking Jesus because God would not allow it, but they were acknowledging the power of Jesus over them.

IV. Protestant Reformers Denied Mary as Mediatrix

The Protestant Reformers denied the role of Mary as Mediatrix because for them that would equate her to Christ. However that is not the Catholic viewpoint. The Catholic Church teaches that she is Mediatrix or Coredemptrix in the sense that she is a cooperator in Jesus’ work of redemption, just as man is a cooperator in God’s plan, yet that does not elevate him to the status equal with God.

Instead of quoting the Protestant Reformers, let me rather quote one Protestant scholar today who represents the modern trend among Evangelicals today who agree with what the Catholic Church teaches. Anglican theologian John MacQuarrie writes:

“In the glimpses of Mary that we have in the Gospels, her standing at the cross beside her Son, and her prayers and intercessions with the apostles, are particularly striking ways in which Mary shared and supported the work of Christ – and even these are ways in which the Church as a whole can have a share in co-redemption. But it is Mary who has come to symbolize that perfect harmony between the divine will and the human response, so that it is she who gives meaning to the expression Corredemptrix” (MacQuarrie, pp.113-114).

V. Objections Against the Doctrine of the Intercession of Mary

a. “Mary is not a goddess, and there is nothing to justify praying to her. In Scripture, there is absolutely no example of anyone praying to a dead saint. There is good reason for this: the human being who dies and goes with the Lord is still human. Mary is not omniscient, omnipresent, nor omnipotent. She cannot hear and answer prayer” (Pezzotta, p. 139).

b. For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus (1 Tim.2:5).

c. Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but by me” (Jn.14:6).

d. “And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved" (Acts 4:12).

Concerning the abovementioned objections, the following are advanced as answers:

a. Nobody in his right mind thinks Mary is a goddess, else Trinitarian faith is lost in favor of polytheism. No verse in the entire Bible prohibits a Christian to ask another Christian to pray for him or her to God. Fundamentalists have committed a grave error when they equate prayer with worship. Worship is given to God alone as Jesus Christ said: “You shall worship the Lord your God and serve Him alone” (Matt.4:10). But prayer does not mean worship as the dictionary defines: “Pray – to make a fervent request for something; to beseech; to implore (from Latin precari – to entreat)” (The American Heritage Dictionary, 1989, p. 539). The rich man even prayed to Abraham but Abraham did not rebuke him from praying to him by equating it to worshipping him, “I pray thee, therefore, father, that thou wouldst send him to my father’s house, for I have five brethren…” (Lk.16:27-28, KJV).

Furthermore, a saint who is in heaven is not dead, but fully alive. To believe otherwise is to embrace the faith of the Sadducees. Jesus said to these Sadducees (also applicable to modern Sadduceean belief today), “God is not the God of the dead but of the living” (Matt.22:32). The saints in heaven are not limited anymore with place and time unlike human beings here on earth, but “Neither can they die anymore: for they are equal unto the angels” (Lk.20:36, KJV). As angels are pure spirits who can see and hear us and even rejoices when a sinner repents, the saints in heaven, especially the Blessed Virgin Mary, see our plight and hear our pleas to God, so that our prayers to her do not go unheeded but are surely presented powerfully to God. Missing to ask for her motherly care and powerful intercessions surely is a great loss to our Protestant friends.

b. Virgin Mary and the saints do not usurp Christ’s sole mediatorship but they participate in it. It is not the usual Fundamentalist unnecessary pitting of Christ against the saints, or the Evangelical either-Christ-or-the-Saints futile dilemma, but it is the Catholic spirituality of Christ-together-with-His-saints which is the answer to all confusions of our separated brethren. There should be no willful human asunder what God has joined together as one.

c. Virgin Mary as our ever loving and faithful spiritual mother always points us to her Son Jesus and leads us closer to Him as she is to Him.

d. The objection is inappropriate since Catholic theology never claims that there is salvation through the name of Mary. Salvation is only accomplished in the name of Jesus our Savior and the Blessed Virgin Mary is God’s powerful pointer to Jesus her Son.

V. The Testimony of the Early Church Fathers

The early Church Fathers like Origen, St. Epiphanius and St. Augustine expounded on the spiritual Motherhood of Mary of the whole redeemed humanity through her powerful intercession for salvation of all. Explicit testimonies, however, on her role as Mediatrix began in the eighth century.

St. Germanus of Constantinople (+733): Nobody can achieve salvation except thorough thee… O Most Holy One…nobody can receive a gift of grace except through thee…O Most Chaste One” (Or.9,5. Lesson of the Office of the Feast).

St. Bernard of Clairvaux (+1153): “God wished that we have nothing, except by the hands of Mary” (In Vig. Nativit. Domini serm.3,10).

St. Albert the Great. “The universal dispenser of all riches” (omnium bonitatum universlitier distributa; Super Missus est q.29).

The Bodily Assumption of Mary into Heaven

2009-09-11T00:57:00.000-07:00

The Bodily Assumption of Mary into Heaven
written by: Bro. Rey V. Entila (written: June 2005)
CFD - Bacolod

Virgin Mary’s Bodily Assumption. This doctrine states that Mary, after her life on earth was over, entered heaven with both body and soul, through God’s sovereign power.

I. The Teaching of the Church
Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary

"Finally the Immaculate Virgin, preserved free from all stain of original sin, when the course of her earthly life was finished, was taken up body and soul into heavenly glory, and exalted by the Lord as Queen over all things, so that she might be the more fully conformed to her Son, the Lord of lords and conqueror of sin and death" (Pope Pius XII, August 15, 1950). The Assumption of the Blessed Virgin is a singular participation in her Son's Resurrection and an anticipation of the resurrection of other Christians:

In giving birth you kept your virginity; in your Dormition you did not leave the world, O Mother of God, but were joined to the source of Life. You conceived the living God and, by your prayers, will deliver our souls from death” (CCC 966).

II. Old Testament Prefigurement

The Assumption of Blessed Virgin Mary differs from the Ascension of Jesus Christ in that in the Assumption, Mary was taken to heaven by God’s power, whereas in the Ascension, Jesus went up to heaven by his own divine power.

“Enoch walked with God; and he was not, for God took him” Gn.5:24 (Hb11:5). Enoch was taken to heaven without dying.

“And as they still went on and talked, behold, a chariot of fire and horses of fire separated the two of them. And Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven. And Elisha saw it and he cried, "My father, my father! the chariots of Israel and its horsemen!" And he saw him no more” (2Kg 2:11-12).

Elijah assumed into heaven in fiery chariot. In Catholic theology, both Enoch and Elijah entered the Limbus Patrum (Place of the Fathers or Sheol of the Righteous), which is also called Abraham’s bosom (Lk.16:22) or Paradise cf. Lk.23:43, not heaven because heaven (or paradise) was closed after Adam and Eve sinned. In Ephesians 4:48-9 Jesus emptied limbus patrum when he finally brought the Old Testament saints to heaven.

If Enoch and Elijah did not die because God willed it so, how much more with the Blessed Virgin Mary, the mother of His Son, since she was more privileged than all the prophets and apostles by giving (not just preaching) to the world the Redeemer? “Elijah because of great zeal for the law was taken up into heaven” (1 Mac 2:58). A prophecy in the Psalms is traditionally attributed to Mary: “Arise, O LORD, and go to thy resting place, thou and the ark of thy might” (Psalm 132:8).

III. New Testament Fulfillment

a. Synoptics

“The tombs also were opened, and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised, and coming out of the tombs after his resurrection they went into the holy city and appeared to many” (Mt 27:52-53). Many saints who had fallen asleep were raised (picture of victory over death; the curtain in the temple was rent into two from top to bottom, God’s doing, not man’s) to signify that there is no more division for Jews and gentiles – all have access to God. These resurrected Old Testament saints were brought by Jesus to heaven during His Ascension (cf. Eph.4:8-9).

b. John

“Then God's temple in heaven was opened, and the ark of his covenant was seen within his temple; and there were flashes of lightning, voices, peals of thunder, an earthquake, and heavy hail. And a great portent appeared in heaven, a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars” (Rev.11:19-12:1). The description of the
ark in heaven and the woman clothed with the sun depicts that the Blessed Virgin Mary is already in heaven. She is the ark of the covenant in the new Testament. As the Old Testament Ark of the Covenant was lost when the Babylonians seiged Judah during the time of Jeremiah, it could not be found anymore. Some Jewish scholars say it is under the Muslim Dome of the Rock or in Ethiopia, but the Bible says, it’s already in heaven in the person of Mary.

Since the Book of Revelation is written in highly symbolic language, St. John pictured Mary as the New Ark of the Covenant. While the Old Testament Ark of the Covenant contained the staff of Aaron that budded flowers, manna and the two stone tablets containing the Ten Commandments, The Blessed Virgin Mary contained in her womb Jesus, the Word of God, the real Manna from heaven and the one who holds the iron rod as king of all nations. Just as the Ark was made of pure gold and cannot be profaned by any mortal man, Mary was all-pure , virgin and holy, described as being clothed with the sun.

“When he opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slain for the word of God and for the witness they had borne” (Rev. 6:9); “Then I saw thrones, and seated on them were those to whom judgment was committed. Also I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for their testimony to Jesus and for the word of God, and who had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life, and reigned with Christ a thousand years” (Rev.20:4). While John saw only the souls of the martyrs and saints in heaven, in Rev. 12:1 he saw Mary in heaven united in both body and soul.

c. Paul

“For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command, with the archangel's call, and with the sound of the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first; then we who are alive, who are left, shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air; and so we shall always be with the Lord”(1 Thess 4:16-17). Baptists and Born-gain Christians believe that believers shall be caught up to meet the Lord in the air when He comes again in glory. This they call as Rapture. If they believe that Christians will be raptured, how can they make it impossible for Mary to be raptured when God willed it so?

No tomb or remains can ever be pointed to about the Mary. The tombs of Jesus, Peter, Paul and apostles are located but never with Virgin Mary. The constant belief of the Church since the beginning of Christianity is that Mary assumed both body and soul to heaven (whether she died or not, it is not defined authoritatively by the church).

The discrepancy among non-Catholic Christians is that their belief has no historical continuity, but has only a sudden and jihadic jump from 1st century to 16th cent, gaining only total amnesia of what happened in the intervening years. No oral tradition also when the bible clearly tells that there is oral tradition passed on from generation to generation (cf.2Thess.2:15).

“In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we shall be changed” (1Cor 15:52). At the resurrection Christians shall be changed from having the corruptible body to an incorruptible one which is the glorified body. Since flesh and bones cannot inherit heaven, we must all be changed. However, the unrighteous ones will suffer from unglorified bodies in contrast to the righteous ones. In the case of the Blessed Virgin Mary, however, she received the privilege of taking on her glorified body in heaven, experiencing ahead what all Christians will experience in the future resurrection.

It might be questioned that since Mary died, as admitted by many Catholic theologians today, then she must have been contaminated by original sin. “For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Rom 6:23). The word sin here is singular, referring to original sin. Death here refers both to physical and spiritual death. It can be answered that Virgin Mary did not suffer spiritual death which is separation from God. Just like Jesus here Son, Blessed Mary’s death was not caused by original or actual sin, but a natural consequence to the human physical body that is not designed by God for immortality.

As St. Paul himself was caught up in heaven when he wrote, “I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago was caught up to the third heaven--whether in the body or out of the body I do not know, God knows” (2 Cor. 12:2), even so the Blessed Mother was assumed to heaven in both body and soul. We know this by certainty, aside from the experiences of the Old and New Testament personages who were taken to heaven, but also because of the Apostolic Tradition which the Holy Catholic Church received from the Apostles themselves. “So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter” (2 Thess. 2:15).

IV. Martin Luther on the Assumption of Mary

Contrary to myriads of Evangelical and Fundamentalist preachers today, the dean of the Reformation held the belief that Mary is now in heaven. Christian denominations like Seventh Day Adventists, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Iglesia ni Cristo (Manalo) Iglesia ng Diyos (Eli Soriano), and Pentecostal churches that believe in soul sleep, naturally place Mary not in heaven now, but still sleeping like all the rest of the dead, in her tomb. No one, however, can read explicitly or implicitly from the Bible the unbiblical idea “soul sleep”. The teaching of Jesus on the poor man Lazarus who went to Abraham’s bosom after death and the rich man tormented in hell after his physical death, completely negates their “soul sleep” idea. Martin Luther himself, the Patriarch of all Protestant thinkers, never doubts Mary’s assumption to heaven by stating:

"There can be no doubt that the Virgin Mary is in heaven. How it happened we do not know." [Martin Luther, Weimar edition of Martin Luther's Works (Translation by William J. Cole) 10, p. 268.

V. Objections Against the Doctrine of the Virgin Mary’s Assumption to Heaven

a. “The dogma (Assumption of Mary to Heaven) is based neither on the Word of God nor on tradition, but simply, it seems, on the consensus of contemporary church opinion and theological ‘suitability’”. (Armstrong, p. 124.)

b. We still await for the resurrection day before our bodies are united with our souls, and after that, enter heaven.
c. The dead are still asleep until the Final Coming of Jesus at the last day. (SDA, JW, Pentecostals, etc)

The abovementioned objections by the Fundamentalists can be answered respectively:

a. It was already shown how the Patriarch Enoch was taken by God to heaven and how the fiery Prophet Elijah was caught by God’s fiery chariot to heaven. How can bodily assumption be not Biblical? In the New Testament, the Old Testament saints resurrected from the dead, their body and soul reunited, and entered God’s glory. How can God’s mother be denied of such a great privilege that even Old Testament men and women enjoyed? The doctrine of the bodily assumption is biblical and the Church’s teaching is neither a contemporary opinion nor theological suitability since the Church Fathers even asserted it. Much more, the dean of Protestantism, Luther, upheld it.

b. The Bible says that after death, there is Particular Judgement, which is a judgment rendered to each person (cf. Heb.9:27). After both the rich man and the poor Lazarus died, they both received their just judgement: the greedy rich entered Hades and the poor Lazarus entered the blessedness of eternal life (Lk.16:22-36?). John the Revelator saw the souls already in heaven facing God and praying to Him (Rev.6:9-10). The Blessed Mother, at the end of her sinless life, enjoyed the beatific vision of God in heaven.

c. The recent man-made doctrine of Soul sleep is neither found in the Bible nor the idea of it. The bible tells us that after death, there is judgment (Heb.9:27) and the person does not sleep but goes to the eternal bliss in heaven, or to temporary purification or to eternal damnation in hell. The Blessed Mother went straight to heaven after her life on earth was over.

VI. The Testimony of the Early Church Fathers

Bodily Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary

Epiphanius. "If the Holy Virgin had died and was buried, her falling asleep would have been surrounded with honour, death would have found her pure, and her crown would have been a virginal one...Had she been martyred according to what is written: 'Thine own soul a sword shall pierce', then she would shine gloriously among the martyrs, and her holy body would have been declared blessed; for by her, did light come to the world" (Panarion,78:23 (A.D. 377).

Gregory of Tours. "[T]he Apostles took up her body on a bier and placed it in a tomb; and they guarded it, expecting the Lord to come. And behold, again the Lord stood by them; and the holy body having been received, He commanded that it be taken in a cloud into paradise: where now, rejoined to the soul, [Mary] rejoices with the Lord's chosen ones..." (Eight Books of Miracles,1:4 (inter A.D. 575-593).

Modestus of Jerusalem. "As the most glorious Mother of Christ, our Savior and God and the giver of life and immortality, has been endowed with life by him, she has received an eternal incorruptibility of the body together with him who has raised her up from the tomb and has taken her up to himself in a way known only to him." (Encomium in dormitionnem Sanctissimae Dominae nostrae Deiparae semperque Virginis Mariae(PG 86-II,3306),(ante A.D. 634) from Munificentissimus Deus).

Theoteknos of Livias. "It was fitting ... that the most holy-body of Mary, God-bearing body, receptacle of God, divinized, incorruptible, illuminated by divine grace and full glory ... should be entrusted to the earth for a little while and raised up to heaven in glory, with her soul pleasing to God" (Homily on the Assumption(ante A.D. 650).

Germanus of Constantinople. "You are she who, as it is written, appears in beauty, and your virginal body is all holy, all chaste, entirely the dwelling place of God, so that it is henceforth completely exempt from dissolution into dust. Though still human, it is changed into the heavenly life of incorruptibility, truly living and glorious, undamaged and sharing in perfect life." (Sermon I(PG 98,346),(ante A.D. 733),from (Munificentissimus Deus).

John Damascene. "It was fitting that the she, who had kept her virginity intact in childbirth, should keep her own body free from all corruption even after death. It was fitting that she, who had carried the Creator as a child at her breast, should dwell in the divine tabernacles. It was fitting that the spouse, whom the Father had taken to himself, should live in the divine mansions. It was fitting that she, who had seen her Son upon the cross and who had thereby received into her heart the sword of sorrow which she had escaped when giving birth to him, should look upon him as he sits with the Father, It was fitting that God's Mother should possess what belongs to her Son, and that she should be honored by every creature as the Mother and as the handmaid of God" (Dormition of Mary(PG 96,741),(ante A.D. 749) from (Munificentissimus Deus).

John Damascene. "'St. Juvenal, Bishop of Jerusalem, at the Council of Chalcedon (451), made known to the Emperor Marcian and Pulcheria, who wished to possess the body of the Mother of God, that Mary died in the presence of all the Apostles, but that her tomb, when opened upon the request of St. Thomas, was found empty; wherefrom the Apostles concluded that the body was taken up to heaven' (PG(96:1)(A.D. 747-751).

Gregorian Sacramentary. "Venerable to us, O Lord, is the festivity of this day on which the holy Mother of God suffered temporal death, but still could not be kept down by the bonds of death, who has begotten Thy Son our Lord incarnate from herself" (Veneranda(ante A.D. 795), from Munificentissimus Deus.).

Byzantine Liturgy. "God, the King of the universe, has granted you favors that surpass nature. As he kept you virgin in childbirth, thus he kept your body incorrupt in the tomb and has glorified it by his divine act of transferring it from the tomb.", from Munificentissimus Deus).

Timotheus of Jerusalem. "[T]he virgin is up to now immortal, as He who lived, translated her into the place of reception" (6th-8th century).

The Catechism of the Catholic Church speaks on Mary the eschatological icon of the Church:

“After speaking of the Church, her origin, mission, and destiny, we can find no better way to conclude than by looking to Mary. In her we contemplate what the Church already is in her mystery on her own "pilgrimage of faith," and what she will be in the homeland at the end of her journey. There, "in the glory of the Most Holy and Undivided Trinity," "in the communion of all the saints," the Church is awaited by the one she venerates as Mother of her Lord and as her own mother.
‘In the meantime the Mother of Jesus, in the glory which she possesses in body and soul in heaven, is the image and beginning of the Church as it is to be perfected in the world to come. Likewise she shines forth on earth until the day of the Lord shall come, a sign of certain hope and comfort to the pilgrim People of God’” (CCC 972).

The Most Blessed Virgin Mary, when the course of her earthly life was completed, was taken up body and soul into the glory of heaven, where she already shares in the glory of her Son's Resurrection, anticipating the resurrection of all members of his Body” (CCC 974).

"We believe that the Holy Mother of God, the new Eve, Mother of the Church, continues in heaven to exercise her maternal role on behalf of the members of Christ" (Paul VI)(CCC 975).

Mary Crowned as Queen of HMeaven and Earth

2009-09-10T22:51:00.000-07:00

Mary Crowned as Queen of Heaven and Earth
Written by: Bro. Rey V. Entila
CFD - Diocese of Bacolod (Written: June 2005)

Mary is Queen of Heaven and Earth. Since Mary gave birth to Jesus her son who is the King of heaven and earth, Mary is also honored by the Church as the Queen of heaven and earth.

I. The Teaching of the Church

Lumen Gentium 59, Vatican II states: “She was exalted by the Lord as Queen of all in order that she might be more thoroughly conformed to her Son, the Lord of lords (cf. Apoc.19:16) and the conqueror of sin and death.” Elsewhere, the Council calls Mary “Queen of the Apostles”. (Abbott, p. 90).

Pope Pius XII: “The Blessed Virgin has not only been given the highest degree of excellence and perfection after Christ, but also she shares in the power which her Son and our Redeemer exercises over the minds and wills of men. For if the Word of God, through the human nature assumed by him, works miracles and gives grace, if he uses the Sacraments and uses his saints as instruments for the salvation of souls, why should he not use his Blessed Mother’s office and activity to bring us the fruits of the Redemption” (O’Carroll, p.302).

II. Old Testament Prefigurement

The crowning

The Old Testament describes the destiny of the faithful who lived exemplary lives for God’s glory. God Himself will given them a glorious crown. “Therefore they will receive a glorious crown and a beautiful diadem from the hand of the Lord, because with his right hand he will cover them, and with his arm he will shield them” (Wis. 5:16).

They will eternally shine like stars in the heavens. “And those who are wise shall shine like the brightness of the firmament; and those who turn many to righteousness, like the stars for ever and ever” (Dan.12:3). Mary, in her bodily assumption to heaven has been crowned and glorified among God’s elect.

Queenship

The inspired writer of Psalms describes the important role of the Queen in the Kingdom. Mary as Queen stands at the right hand of of Jesus the King. “daughters of kings are among your ladies of honor; at your right hand stands the queen in gold of Ophir” (Psalm 45:9).

“And he said, "Pray ask King Solomon--he will not refuse you--to give me Abishag the Shunammite as my wife." Bathsheba said, "Very well; I will speak for you to the king." So Bathsheba went to King Solomon, to speak to him on behalf of Adonijah. And the king rose to meet her, and bowed down to her; then he sat on his throne, and had a seat brought for the king's mother; and she sat on his right. Then she said, "I have one small request to make of you; do not refuse me." And the king said to her, "Make your request, my mother; for I will not refuse you" (1 Kings 2:17-20). In the great tradition of Israel, it is the King’s mother who is the Queen, not one of his wives, so that his subjects will not be confused who is the real queen. She is called in Hebrew as “Gebirah” (great lady). In the case of King Solomon, the Queen was not one of his 1000 wives, but his mother Bathsheba. Solomon honored her by bowing in her presence as she sits enthroned beside his throne. Note King Solomon’s twice repeated words to his mother “he (the King) will not refuse you.” The Queen’s intercession is powerful to move the King.

The following verses show that the King’s mother is the Queen of the Kingdom. “He also removed Maacah his mother from being queen mother because she had an abominable image made for Asherah; and Asa cut down her image and burned it at the brook Kidron” (1 Kings 15:13).

She is not just a weak symbolic figure, but she shows might and strength. “Now when Athaliah the mother of Ahaziah saw that her son was dead, she arose and destroyed all the royal family of house of Judah” (2 Chron. 22:10).

The king sent the royal queen and asks for her return, of which she gives him the allotted time, signifying the respect and consultation of the king to his queen. “And the king said to me, "How long will you be gone, and when will you return?" So it pleased the king to send me; and I set him a time” (Neh. 2:6).
III. New Testament Fulfillment

a. John

Jesus promised the crown of life to his faithful disciples. Note that his condition in giving the crown is “faithfulness until death” which is a day-to-day obedience to God’s holy will and not a kind of popular evangelistic crusade of once-and-for-all acceptance of Jesus as personal Lord and Savior. “Do not fear what you are about to suffer. Behold, the devil is about to throw some of you into prison, that you may be tested, and for ten days you will have tribulation. Be faithful unto death, and I will give you the crown of life” (Rev. 2:10).

The beloved Apostle John was given the privilege to behold “a great portent appeared in heaven, a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars” (Rev. 12:1). Combining the Old Testament imagery of crown (Wis.5:16) and stars (Dan.12:3), the singular woman is portrayed as the heavenly Queen whose brilliance is not caused by precious stones and diadems but by the heavenly luminaries. That is the Virgin Mary who gave birth to Jesus her only Son.

Queenly Mother of the New Davidic Kingdom

Jesus the King of the New Israel of God gave his queenly mother to his beloved disciple to be the spiritual mother and queen. The beloved disciple represents all of us Christians as beloved disciples. Therefore, in the new dispensation, mary is both our mother and queen. “When Jesus saw his mother, and the disciple whom he loved standing near, he said to his mother, "Woman, behold, your son!" (John 19:26).

The dragon Satan, has enmity (war) against the woman who is Mary. But not only that, Satan is also angry with the rest of the woman’s spiritual offsprings who are the Christians. “Then the dragon was angry with the woman, and went off to make war on the rest of her offspring, on those who keep the commandments of God and bear testimony to Jesus. And he stood on the sand of the sea” (Rev. 12:17).

Jewish traditions tell us that the good visitors will be the one who will serve the hosts of the house and other visitors too. Mary, who had the heart of the servant and sensitive to the needs of humanity, pleaded to Jesus for help. “When the wine failed, the mother of Jesus said to him, "They have no wine" (John 2:3).

Jesus, like King Solomon who could not refuse his beloved queen mother, responded as an obedient son. “Jesus said to them, "Fill the jars with water." And they filled them up to the brim” (John 2:7). Even though it was not yet time for Jesus to reveal His glory, because of His mother’s intercession, he in His all-knowing nature, hastened to reveal His hour of the revelation of His identity and mission.

b. Paul, James and Peter

Consistent with the Old Testament and Gospel accounts, the pillars of the Apostles Peter and James (and also John, cf.Gal.2:9) and Paul reiterated the crowning of Christians as their just rewards after their life on earth is over. Paul describes the Crown of righteousness, James, the crown of life, and Peter, the crown of glory. “Henceforth there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, will award to me on that Day, and not only to me but also to all who have loved his appearing” (2 Tim 4:8).

“Blessed is the man who endures trial, for when he has stood the test he will receive the crown of life which God has promised to those who love him” (James 1:12).
“And when the chief Shepherd is manifested you will obtain the unfading crown of glory” (1 Peter 5:4). Just as “eternal life”, “life”, “fullness of life”, and “life everlasting” do not describe quantities of life but the quality of life, these crowns do not necessarily mean that there will be different crowns, as fundamentalists today assert, but these are descriptions of honor and glory that a Christian will obtain in heaven during the judgment day.

IV. Fundamentalist Objections Vs. the Queenship of Mary

“And the title, ‘Queen of Heaven,’ is equally false, or even worse. Heaven has no ‘queen’. The only references in Scriptures to prayers to the ‘queen of heaven’ are found in Jeremiah 7:18; 44:17-19,25, where it is severely condemned as a heathen custom practiced by some apostate Jews. This so-called ‘queen of heaven’ was a Canaanitish goddess of fertility, Astarte, (plural, Ashtaroth) (Judges 2:13). How shameful to impose a heathen title on Mary, and then to venerate her as another deity!” (Boettner, p.142.)

The direct answer to the abovementioned objection is that the title of Mary as “Queen of Heaven” necessarily follows the title given to Jesus her Son as King of kings. As one cannot deny that Jesus is the King of kings and Lord of lords (Rev.19:16; Jn.18:36-37), one cannot also deny the fact that the theocratic kingdom of Israel proclaims as Queen the mother of the King. In Rev.12:1-2, the woman who gave birth to the child who was destined to be king, was crowned with twelve stars, thus a royal queen.

If there are pagan queens in the Bible like Astarte, and pagan queens in the neighboring countries of Israel, there are also real queens in the kingdom, like for example, Bathsheba the queen mother of Solomon, and queen Athaliah. To deduce that since ancient pagans have similarities with the true and Catholic religion, then Catholicism must be pagan, is a non-sequitor argument or it does not follow. Hindus have the trinity called Brahma, Shiva and Vishnu but this does not make the Christian doctrine of the Holy Trinity pagan and false. In the same way, the Roman god Mithra resurrected from the dead, does not mean that Christ’s resurrection is a pagan myth. The fact is, Mary is portrayed by the Bible as Queen and the whole history of Christianity attests to this apostolic tradition since the first century onwards. In fact, the opposite is true: Nowhere in the Bible can one find a verse that explicitly or implicitly states that Mary is not Queen and never can be queen. In the same vein, nowhere in the whole of Christian antiquity does any Church Father deny the queenship of Mary.

V. The Testimony of the Early Church Fathers

John Damascene or John of Damascus(ca.675-749/753) was the last and one of the greatest Church Father of the East. He did scholarly work on the Incarnation and was the champion of the church against the Iconoclast heresy. He also wrote about the Blessed Virgin Mary in his wonderful work De Fide Orthodoxa.

“And it can likewise be said that the first one who with heavenly voice announced Mary’s royal office was Gabriel the Archangel himself” (St. John of Damascus).

The angelic greeting “Hail!” to Mary is used to address royalties as in “Hail, Caesar!” “Hail! King of the Jews”, the angel thereby had shown that Mary is of the royal family of God. The archangel Gabriel who is above all other angels, just as angels are above human beings (Ps.8:5), saluted Mary, instead of she saluting her. In Joshua 5:24, Joshua the successor of Moses bowed down to the ground when he was face to face with the archangel, but in the case of Mary, it was the reverse. This shows the royal dignity of Mary, above all men and angels of God. Truthfully, she is called in the whole Christian history as “Queen of heaven and earth”, “Queen of the Apostles”.

The Immaculate Conception of Mary

2009-09-10T22:48:00.000-07:00

The Immaculate Conception of Mary
Written by: Bro. Rey V. Entila
CFD - Diocese of Bacolod

Immaculate Conception is the title given to the Blessed Virgin Mary as sinless at the moment her mother (St. Anne) conceived her in the womb. She enjoyed both freedom from concupiscence or human nature’s tendencies towards sin, and freedom from actual sin.

I. The Teaching of the Church

“To become the mother of the Savior, Mary "was enriched by God with gifts appropriate to such a role." The angel Gabriel at the moment of the annunciation salutes her as "full of grace". In fact, in order for Mary to be able to give the free assent of her faith to the announcement of her vocation, it was necessary that she be wholly borne by God's grace” (CCC 490). “Through the centuries the Church has become ever more aware that Mary, "full of grace" through God, was redeemed from the moment of her conception. That is what the dogma of the Immaculate Conception confesses, as Pope Pius IX proclaimed in 1854:

‘The most Blessed Virgin Mary was, from the first moment of her conception, by a singular grace and privilege of almighty God and by virtue of the merits of Jesus Christ, Savior of the human race, preserved immune from all stain of original sin’” (CCC 491).

“The ‘splendor of an entirely unique holiness’ by which Mary is ‘enriched from the first instant of her conception’ comes wholly from Christ: she is ‘redeemed, in a more exalted fashion, by reason of the merits of her Son’. The Father blessed Mary more than any other created person ‘in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places’ and chose her ‘in Christ before the foundation of the world, to be holy and blameless before him in love’” (CCC 492).

“The Fathers of the Eastern tradition call the Mother of God ‘the All-Holy’ (Panagia), and celebrate her as ‘free from any stain of sin, as though fashioned by the Holy Spirit and formed as a new creature’. By the grace of God Mary remained free of every personal sin her whole life long” (CCC 493).

II. Old Testament Prefigurement

The doctrine of the Immaculate Conception is not explicitly revealed in Scripture, but is contained implicitly in the following passages.

“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" (Gen. 3:15).

The proper context was that God was talking about the enmity between the serpent (the devil) and the woman (Eve). But since Eve was tempted and overpowered by the devil, the early Church Fathers read God’s word as the Protoevangelion (lit. “first good news”) predicting the war between the devil and the woman (Mary), and between the offspring of the devil and the offspring of the woman, Jesus. In contrast to the First Eve who was deceived and stained by sin, the Second Eve who is Mary is never deceived nor stained by sin. Just as the First Adam fell and all humanity fell, the Second Adam who is Jesus never shared in the downfall of man to sin, but overpowered both the serpent and sin to give new life to the fallen humanity. Thus the historic Church in her 2000 years of existence has always believed and therefore taught that Mary is conceived without sin.

The Old Testament Ark of New Covenant Foreshadowed Mary as the New Ark of the Covenant

Just as God commanded Moses to make the Ark of the Covenant made of purest gold to contain the Decalogue (literally, “Ten Words”), Virgin Mary was preserved by God from all stain of sin so that she will be the purest vessel to hold the sinless Word of God in her womb. “And you shall overlay it with pure gold, within and without shall you overlay it, and you shall make upon it a molding of gold round about. And you shall cast four rings of gold for it and put them on its four feet, two rings on the one side of it, and two rings on the other side of it. You shall make poles of acacia wood, and overlay them with gold. And you shall put the poles into the rings on the sides of the ark, to carry the ark by them… And you shall put into the ark the testimony which I shall give you. Then you shall make a mercy seat of pure gold; two cubits and a half shall be its length, and a cubit and a half its breadth. And you shall make two cherubim of gold; of hammered work shall you make them, on the two ends of the mercy seat. Make one cherub on the one end, and one cherub on the other end; of one piece with the mercy seat shall you make the cherubim on its two ends. The cherubim shall spread out their wings above, overshadowing the mercy seat with their wings, their faces one to another; toward the mercy seat shall the faces of the cherubim be” (Ex 25:11-21).

God’s Ark of the Covenant cannot be defiled by mortal man for God punishes the transgressor with immediate death. Virgin Mary was more than the inanimate golden Ark for aside from being made in the image and likeness of God, she was made to be the immaculate container of the all-holy Son of God. Just as God created Adam and Eve immaculate who later succumbed to sin by disobedience, Mary who is the Second Eve was also given the grace of God to be immaculately created. But unlike Eve, she will never lose that grace by pride and disobedence. “And the anger of the LORD was kindled against Uzzah; and God smote him there because he put forth his hand to the ark; and he died there beside the ark of God” (2 Sam. 6:7). The book of Chronicles repeats what terrible thing that happened to Uzzah, despite Uzzah’s good intention to save the ark from falling into the ground. God’s holiness is mysterious and beyond comprehension. “And when they came to the threshing floor of Chidon, Uzzah put out his hand to hold the ark, for the oxen stumbled. And the anger of the LORD was kindled against Uzzah; and he smote him because he put forth his hand to the ark; and he died there before God” (1 Chron. 13:9-10).

David himself, the greatest king of Old Testament Israel, honored (venerated) the Ark as an example to all God’s holy people. The Ark was venerated just as Mary is venerated above all God’s creatures, but adoration is given to God alone. The Catholic Church had through her 2000 years of existence, zealously guarded this great Scriptural and holy tradition of the chosen people of God. “David built houses for himself in the city of David; and he prepared a place for the ark of God, and pitched a tent for it. Then David said, "No one but the Levites may carry the ark of God, for the LORD chose them to carry the ark of the LORD and to minister to him for ever."… And they brought the ark of God, and set it inside the tent which David had pitched for it; and they offered burnt offerings and peace offerings before God” (1 Chron. 15:1-2; 16:1).

The Old Ark of the Covenant and Mary the New Ark of the Covenant
Old Testament Ark of the Covenant Mary as New Ark of the Covenant

1.“And David arose and went with all the people who were with him from Baale-judah, to bring up from there the ark of God, which is called by the name of the LORD of hosts who sits enthroned on the cherubim.” (2 Sam. 6:2)

“In those days Mary arose and went with haste into the hill country, to a city of Judah” (Luke 1:39).

2.“As the ark of the LORD came into the city of David, Michal the daughter of Saul looked out of the window, and saw King David leaping and dancing before the LORD; and she despised him in her heart.” (2 Sam. 6:16)
“And when Elizabeth heard the greeting of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit” (Luke 1:41).

3. “And David was afraid of the LORD that day; and he said, "How can the ark of the LORD come to me?" (2 Sam. 6:9).

“And why is this granted me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?”
(Luke 1:43).

4. “And the ark of the LORD remained in the house of O'bed-e'dom the Gittite three months; and the LORD blessed O'bed-e'dom and all his household.”(2 Sam.6:11/ 1 Chron.13:14) “And Mary remained with her about three months, and returned to her home.” (Lk. 1:56)

There is a striking parallelism in the way the Ark of the Covenant of Old Testament was described and how Mary was described by Luke. First, David arose and the Ark was brought up to Jerusalem as Mary arose and went up to a hill country. Second, As David was in the presence of the Ark that contained God’s Word, he leaped and danced for joy, just as when the baby John the Baptist was in the presence of Mary the new Ark who conceived the Word of God, he leaped for joy. Third, just as David inquired how privileged he is that the Ark should come to him, Elizabeth who was filled by the Holy Spirit, expressed her deep gratitude how the mother (the Ark) of the Lord should come to her. Fourth, the Ark/ Virgin Mary stayed in the house for three months. These are not just mere accidental parallelism, but God’s Providence working in the inspired author of the Gospel.

III. New Testament Fulfillment

a. Synoptics

“And he came to her and said, "Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with you!"…And the angel said to her, "Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God… For with God nothing will be impossible." (Luke 1:28,30, 37). In both Old and New Testaments, it is always the human being who is made lower than the angels (Ps.8:5) who will salute/ greet the angel as a sign of reverence. But in the case of Mary, the archangel Gabriel saluted her with the royal greeting “Hail!”, signifying her greater dignity than him. Next, the angel addressed her with a proper name “full of grace”, an apositive given also to Jesus (Jn.1:14). This signifies her perfection given to her as grace by God, an immaculate perfection not only intensively but also extensively, that is, it will extend throughout her life.

“And when Elizabeth heard the greeting of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit and she exclaimed with a loud cry, "Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb!” ( Luk 1:41-42). Elizabeth who was filled with God’s Spirit proclaimed Mary’s blessedness side by side with the blessedness of her Son. According to theologian Ludwig Ott (Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, p.201), “This parallelism suggests that Mary, just like Christ, was from the beginning of her existence, free from all sin.”

b. The Book of Revelation by St. John

The book of Revelation written by St. John depicts what he saw in heaven through the visions given to him by God. God’s temple symbolizes the new people of God and the Ark of the Covenant inside the temple is the new Ark who is the Blessed Virgin Mary. “Then God's temple in heaven was opened, and the ark of his covenant was seen within his temple; and there were flashes of lightning, voices, peals of thunder, an earthquake, and heavy hail” (Rev 11:19).

Since the original book of Revelation had not chapters and verses, John’s vision tells us that after seeing the Ark, he then describes the woman about to give birth to a son who will rule the world. This is undoubtedly Mary. “And a great portent appeared in heaven, a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars; she was with child and she cried out in her pangs of birth, in anguish for delivery” (Rev 12:1-2).

Explanation of The Birth Pains of Mary as Spiritual, not Physical

Fundamentalist churches today, in stark contrast to their 16th century fathers and reformers, are skeptical of the teaching authority of the historic Catholic church and the teachings of their Protestant fathers. They are baffled by the verse in Rev. 12:2 which states “she was with child and she cried out in her pangs of birth, in anguish for delivery.”

Did Virgin Mary experience pangs in delivering the child Jesus? This question might satisfy the confused minds of Fundamentalists, but the Church’s answer is “No, she did not.” First, Isaiah predicted the day when the woman will not physically labor in childbirth. Just as many predictions of Isaiah referred to Jesus, this prediction specifically and traditionally referred to Mary. "Before she was in labor she gave birth; before her pain came upon her she was delivered of a son” (Isaiah 66:7).

Second, a survey of the verses below that what was described in the highly symbolic book of Revelation is not literal physical pain of childbirth, but an anguish for spiritual rebirth of spiritual children.

“Then the dragon was angry with the woman, and went off to make war on the rest of her offspring, on those who keep the commandments of God and bear testimony to Jesus. And he stood on the sand of the sea.” (Rev. 12:17) The offspring described here are not physical ones but spiritual children, the thousands of Christians who followed the commandments of God and who resisted the devil. Therefore, the pangs of childbirth above is also spiritual. The Virgin Mary had only one Son, Jesus, but she has thousands upon thousands of spiritual children throughout the world. This is why the Church has always called her mother of all Christians.

St. Paul describes his suffering for Christians “My little children, with whom I am again in travail until Christ be formed in you!” (Gal 4:19). Creation waits for its final restoration for having been marred by sin “We know that the whole creation has been groaning in travail together until now” (Rom. 8:22).

The Old Testament describes the birth pangs used metaphorically for “What will you say when they set as head over you those whom you yourself have taught to be friends to you? Will not pangs take hold of you, like those of a woman in travail?” (Jer. 13:21). “The iniquity of Ephraim is bound up, his sin is kept in store. The pangs of childbirth come for him, but he is an unwise son; for now he does not present himself at the mouth of the womb” (Hos. 13:12-13). “Now why do you cry aloud? Is there no king in you? Has your counselor perished, that pangs have seized you like a woman in travail? Writhe and groan, O daughter of Zion, like a woman in travail; for now you shall go forth from the city and dwell in the open country; you shall go to Babylon. There you shall be rescued, there the LORD will redeem you from the hand of your enemies” (Micah 4:9-10).

IV. The Protestant Reformers on the Immaculate Conception

As with their strong belief that Mary is the Mother of God, the same Protestant Fathers (Luther, Calvin and Zwingli) also adhered to the Catholic faith that Mary was Immaculately conceived, free from the stain of original sin.

Martin Luther
"But the other conception, namely the infusion of the soul, it is piously and suitably believed, was without any sin, so that while the soul was being infused, she would at the same time be cleansed from original sin and adorned with the gifts of God to receive the holy soul thus infused. And thus, in the very moment in which she began to live, she was without all sin..." (Luther, Volume 4, 694.)
John Calvin

Although John Calvin was not as devoted as Luther to Mary, he called Mary the Holy Virgin.
"It cannot be denied that God in choosing and destining Mary to be the Mother of his Son, granted her the highest honor." (John Calvin, p. 348.)
Ulrich Zwingli
"I esteem immensely the Mother of God, the ever chaste, immaculate Virgin Mary." (Stakemeier, p.456.)
"Christ ... was born of a most undefiled Virgin" (ibid.)
"It was fitting that such a holy Son should have a holy Mother." (ibid.)

V. Objections from Fundamentalist Protestants and Other Sects Against the Doctrine of Immaculate Conception

“There is no scriptural basis for the doctrine (Immaculate Conception), and the earlier Catholic church fathers differed over the matter. Anselm held that Mary was born with original sin. Bernard of Clairvaux contended that she was conceived with original sin, but purified before birth. Thomas Aquinas and the Dominicans held this view, but Duns Scotus popularized the view that Mary was conceived without original sin, and his view eventually prevailed, although Pope Sixtus IV in 1845 and the Council of Trent in 1546 left the issue unresolved.” (Armstrong, p.121).

As to the objection above, it could be answered that, just like the doctrines of Trinity, Incarnation, the two natures of Christ or the hypostatic union which Protestants believe to be true even without the specific word written on the Bible, unknown to many Bible-believing Christians, it was the Catholic Church that coined these words in her centuries of struggles against different heretics in the history of the Church. In the same way, it was the Catholic Church that discerned and proclaimed from both the Bible and Apostolic Tradition the doctrine of Immaculate Conception and the other Marian doctrines.

It is the whole Church, the “pillar and the ground of truth” (1 Tim.3:15), guided “into all truth” by the Holy Spirit (Jn.14:26) and not the individual theologians in their own private opinions on contested matters that can define what is the official doctrine of the Church. St. Bernard of Clairvaux and St. Thomas Aquinas, great theologians they were, differed in their opinions about Mary. Yet, both of them were faithful and obedient children of the Church who would certainly succumb to the Pope when he officially proclaims the Immaculate Conception. If previous Popes and previous Church ecumenical councils did not define the Immaculate Conception, it doesn’t mean that the Church did not believe in it, in the same way that we cannot say that the Church only began believing in the Divinity of Christ and the Trinity only when these doctrines were officially proclaimed in 325 AD in the Council of Nicea. It was only in 1854 that the Pope officially proclaimed the dogma of Immaculate Conception, faithful and true to the teachings of both the Bible and Apostolic Tradition.

Fundamentalist Objections Based on the Erroneous Interpretation of Romans 3:23 ("All have sinned")

The verse that is often quoted out of context by Fundamentalists is “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Rom. 3:23) to demolish the doctrine of the immaculate conception of Mary, stating that Mary was also subject to sin.

First, the Church agrees that she could have been had not for the “prevenient grace” of God that freed her from original sin before she was born. All other human beings are born with original sin but are saved by God later with his “restorative grace”. It is like that God washes through baptism the mudstains of sin all human beings but He specially prevented Mary from being stained by the mudstains before she comes into this world.

Second, the term “all have sinned” which indicates actual sin done in the past does not include everyone because the infants, the mentally retarded and severely senile could not commit sin since they have not reached or have lost mental discretion for knowing what is good or bad.

Third, this does not include Mary or Jesus either, because the former was graced by God to be free from original and actual sin, and the latter is the sinless lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world (Jn.1:29).

Fourth, the word “all” (Gk. “pantes”) does not mean all without exception. The same Apostle writes, “For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive.” (1 Cor. 15:22). Yet, the Bible tells us that there were two men of God who did not die but were taken by God to heaven, Enoch and Elijah (Gen.5:24; 2 Kgs.2:11).

Fifth, the word “all” (“pantes”) is interchanged by Paul in the same chapter with the word “many” (Greek “polloi”). “Therefore as sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all men sinned.” (Rom. 5:12). “For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by one man's obedience many will be made righteous” (Rom. 5:19). Since many and not all are made sinners through the disobedience of Adam, the Church is correct in her belief and practice that Mary is an exception by the power of the grace of God as the angel said to Mary for with God nothing is impossible.

The next verse that Fundamentalists “prove” in futility against the exception of Mary from sin is: “…as it is written: "None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands, no one seeks for God. All have turned aside, together they have gone wrong; no one does good, not even one." (Rom. 3:10-12)

The verse above was taken by St. Paul from Ps.14:1-3/Ps.53:1-3 where the Psalmist laments “The fool says in his heart, "There is no God." They are corrupt, they do abominable deeds, there is none that does good. The LORD looks down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there are any that act wisely, that seek after God. They have all gone astray, they are all alike corrupt; there is none that does good, no, not one.” Note that proper exegesis tells us that we need to consider the proper context of the verse before interpreting or applying it correctly. This is the point when Fundamentalists commit a fatal flaw because the context does not talk about good and obedient people of God but “fools”, atheists, corrupt ones, not the righteous ones.

The Jews have the common figurative language which is called hyperbole or exaggeration to drive their point home. It should not be interpreted literally but as a figure of speech or literary style. Even Jesus who is well familiar of the Jewish customs employed hyperbole in his teachings. One example is when he said, "Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone” (Luke 18:19). Yet in another passage he said “The good man out of his good treasure brings forth good, and the evil man out of his evil treasure brings forth evil” (Mt.12:35). Moreover he said, “And call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven” (Matt.23:9). Yet few chapters before he said, Honor your father and mother, and, You shall love your neighbor as yourself" (Matt.19:19).

VI. The Testimony of the Early Church Fathers

The early Fathers of the Church bravely held on to the constant Apostolic Tradition that the Mother of Jesus was specially graced by God from all men and women to be the pure vessel of His dearly beloved Son. As such, Mary was saved by God by prevention from sin and from committing sin, whereas all other men and women are saved by restoration from original sin to original sanctifying grace.

Immaculate Conception

Hippolytus. "He was the ark formed of incorruptible wood. For by this is signified that His tabernacle was exempt from putridity and corruption" (Orat. Inillud, Dominus pascit me(ante A.D. 235).

Origen. "This Virgin Mother of the Only-begotten of God, is called Mary, worthy of God, immaculate of the immaculate, one of the one" (Homily 1(A.D. 244).

Ambrose. "Mary, a Virgin not only undefiled but a Virgin whom grace has made inviolate, free of every stain of sin" (Sermon 22:30(A.D. 388).

Augustine. "We must except the Holy Virgin Mary, concerning whom I wish to raise no question when it touches the subject of sins, out of honour to the Lord; for from Him we know what abundance of grace for overcoming sin in every particular was conferred upon her who had the merit to conceive and bear Him who undoubtedly had no sin" Nature and Grace,42[36](A.D.415).

John of Damascus. "O most blessed loins of Joachim from which came forth a spotless seed! O glorious womb of Anne in which a most holy offspring grew" Homily I in Nativ.(ante A.D. 749).

St. Thomas Aquinas on Mary's state of grace

"I answer that, God so prepares and endows those, whom He chooses for some particular office, that they are rendered capable of fulfilling it, according to 2 Cor. 3:6: '(Who) has made us fit ministers of the New Testament.' Now the Blessed Virgin was chosen by God to be His Mother. Therefore there can be no doubt that God, by His grace, made her worthy of that office, according to the words spoken to her by the angel (Lk. 1:30,31): 'Thou has found grace with God: behold thou shall conceive,' etc. But she would not have been worthy to be the Mother of God, if she had ever sinned. First, because the honor of the parents reflects on the child, according to Prov. 17:6: 'The glory of children are their fathers': and consequently, on the other hand, the Mother's shame would have reflected on her Son. Secondly, because of the singular affinity between her and Christ, who took flesh from her: and it is written (2 Cor. 6:15): 'What concord has Christ with Belial?' Thirdly, because of the singular manner in which the Son of God, who is the 'Divine Wisdom' (1 Cor. 1:24) dwelt in her, not only in her soul but in her womb. And it is written (Wis. 1:4): 'Wisdom will not enter into a malicious soul, nor dwell in a body subject to sins.'
"We must therefore confess simply that the Blessed Virgin committed no actual sin, neither mortal nor venial; so that what is written (Cant 4:7) is fulfilled: 'Thou art all fair, O my love, and there is not a spot in thee,' etc" (Summa Theologiae III:27:4).

THE OLD AND NEW TESTAMENT ROCKS

2009-09-10T22:41:00.000-07:00

THE OLD AND NEW TESTAMENT ROCKS
written by: bro. Rey V. Entila (written: May 2006)
CFD - Diocese of Bacolod

One of the persistent objections concerning Peter’s role as the foundation-rock of God’s new people is that only God and Christ are called in the Bible as Rock. There is a presumption that this title could not be given to any human being for that would be a usurpation of the divine title. An objective reading of the whole Bible would easily clear up this problem, because the Bible shows that a Patriarch in the Old Testament was called Rock, as well as Peter, patriarch of New People of God, was also called as such.

A. In the Old Testament

a. God the Father as Rock

The Hebrew word “Shur” was used of God. Easton’s Bible Dictionary defines Rock as:

“(Heb. tsur), employed as a symbol of God in the Old Testament (1 Sam. 2:2; 2 Sam. 22:3; Isa. 17:10; Ps. 28:1; 31:2,3; 89:26; 95:1); also in the New Testament (Matt. 16:18; Rom. 9:33; 1 Cor. 10:4). In Dan. 2:45 the Chaldaic form of the Hebrew word is translated ‘mountain.’ It ought to be translated ‘rock,’ as in Hab. 1:12 in the Revised Version. The ‘rock’ from which the stone is cut here signifies the divine origin of Christ”.

According to Augustus Strong, “The rock (or mountain) serves as a figure of security (Ps.61:2), firmness (Job 14:18), and something that endures” (Job 19:24) (Strong, p.765).

The book of Deuteronomy called God the Rock. "The Rock, his work is perfect; for all his ways are justice. A God of faith-fulness and without iniquity, just and right is He” (Deut. 32:4).

The Psalmist repeatedly called God the Rock. “The LORD is my rock, and my fortress, and my deliverer, my God, my rock, in whom I take refuge, my shield, and the horn of my salvation, my stronghold” (Psalm 18:2); “For who is God, but the LORD? And who is a rock, except our God?” (Psalm 18:31); “The LORD lives; and blessed be my rock, and exalted be the God of my salvation” (Psalm 18:46); “Yea, thou art my rock and my fortress; for thy name's sake lead me and guide me, 4 take me out of the net which is hidden for me, for thou art my refuge” (Psalm 31:3-4).

God is Israel’s Rock. “You shall have a song as in the night when a holy feast is kept; and gladness of heart, as when one sets out to the sound of the flute to go to the mountain of the LORD, to the Rock of Israel” (Isa.30:29).

b. Abraham as Rock

Concerning the Patriarch Abraham, the prophet Isaiah wrote: "Hearken to me, you who pursue deliverance, you who seek the LORD; look to the rock from which you were hewn, and to the quarry from which you were digged. 2 Look to Abraham your father and to Sarah who bore you; for when he was but one I called him, and I blessed him and made him many” (Isa. 51:1-2).

Even though the term Rock, which in Hebrew language is Sur, is oftentimes a metaphor for God the Father, this does not imply that throughout the Old Testament, God alone was called that way in the Bible. This passage in Isa. 51:1-2 applies the metaphor to Abraham when it says “look to the rock from which you were hewn” (made or shaped) as it applies to Sarah the “quarry from which you were digged”. As Hebrew poetry is lavished by repetition and parallelism, verse 2 specifies Abraham and Sarah as the one referred in verse 1. So there is no truth in the common non-Catholic statement “God alone is referred to as rock in the whole bible, never to any human being.”

Stanley L. Jaki quoted Two prominent Jewish scholars Strack and Billerbeck, impartial to both Catholics and Protestants alike, who pointed Abraham as rock (Heb. Sur):

‘“When God looked on Abraham, who was to appear, he said: Behold I have found a rock on which I can build and base the world. Therefore he called Abraham a rock’…The earliest parts of Jalkut, a compilation by Simeon Kara (12th century) of Midrash fragments, are from the 5th century!Actually, the earliest of half a dozen other Talmudic texts describing Abtraham as rock, mentioned by Strack and Billerbeck, are from the middle of the second century A.D.” Midrash Jalqut (1,766), as cited in S.L.Jaki, And On This Rock, 2nd ed.,(Manassas, VA:Trinity, 1987), 89.

The Protestant scholar Donald Guthrie also affirms Abraham as rock. “Abraham is spoken of as ‘the Rock from which you were hewn.’(Is.51:1)” (Guthrie, p.837).

Furthermore, The New Strong’s Expanded Dictionary of Bible Words, a renowned standard reference among English-speaking Protestants, (2001) gave in #6697 the no. 8 meaning of rock (tsuwr/ tsoor) (8) Abraham is the source (rock) from which Israel was hewn (Is.51:1). (Strong, p. 765).

As Abraham was the patriarch of the people of God in the Old Testament whose name God Himself changed from Abram to Abraham, later in the New Testament, God in the person of Jesus, changed the name of Simon to Peter the Rock to be the foundation of the New People of God. As Abraham was in his person, the foundation of God’s people, Peter in person will be the foundation of God’s new people. But as Abraham was not given the name “rock”, Simon was the first person in the whole Bible to be called “Rock”.

B. In the New Testament

In the New Dispensation, Christ who was called by St. Paul as Rock, Simon was called by Jesus a rock. Just as Abraham was given by God the Father to share in His rockness, Jesus who is the perfect image of the Father (Col.1:15) shared his rockness to Simon the fisherman.

a. Jesus

St. Paul wrote to the Corinthian Christians concerning the event when the Israelites, after crossing the Red Sea went to Mount Sinai. After giving them quail and manna to eat, God gave them water from the rock that followed them (Ex.17:1-7). “I want you to know, brethren, that our fathers were all under the cloud, and all passed through the sea, and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea, and all ate the same supernatural food and all drank the same supernatural drink. For they drank from the supernatural Rock which followed them, and the Rock was Christ” (1 Cor.10:1-4).

b. Peter

Christ brought His Twelve Apostles in Caesaria Philippi and asked who He really was. No one but Simon was given the revelation by the Father to declare the true identity of Jesus. In Mt 16:13-17 “When Jesus went into the region of Caesarea Philippi he asked his disciples, ‘Who do people say that the Son of Man is?’ They replied, ‘Some say John the Baptist, others Elijah, still others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.’ He said to them, ‘But who do you say that I am?’ Simon Peter said in reply, ‘You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.’ Jesus said to him in reply, ‘Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father.’”

Christ then gives Simon son of Jonah a new name. "And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it” (Mt 16:18). Concerning the place where this event happened, Steve Ray writes: “this fact is too often ignored. Jesus, standing in front of a massive rock in Caesaria Philippi upon which stands the “false church”, the temple of the “divine” Caesar Augustus, says to Peter, “You are Rock”, making a correlation. Then, after the correlation has been made, he looks at Peter and (sic) the massive rock and says, “And upon this Rock I will build my Church” (Ray, Upon This Rock, p.36).

Finally, Jesus gave to Peter the divine commission, "And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.'' (Matt.16:19). This echoes the commission made by God to Eliakim to become the prime Minister of Israel (Isa.22:21-22). Therefore, Peter was just declared to be the Prime Minister of the Church, that is, God’s people.

OLD TESTAMENT TYPES OF ST. PETER

2009-09-10T22:38:00.000-07:00

OLD TESTAMENT TYPES OF ST. PETER: “PRIME MINISTER” “OVER THE HOUSE”, “STEWARD”, “MAJORDOMO”, “VIZIER”
by: bro. Rey V. Entila
CFD - Diocese of Bacolod

A. Joseph the prime Minister

Since the New Testament is hidden in the Old Testament, and the New is understood by studying the Old, some of the important personages who foreshadowed the role of St. Peter in the New Testament will be considered. The first one is Joseph, one of the twelve sons of the Patriarch Jacob, and in fact Jacob’s favorite one since he was born of his beloved Rachel. Just as there were 12 apostles of our Lord whom Peter was chosen to be their leader, among Jacob’s sons, God’s chosen leader and liberator was Joseph.

He was endowed with the gift of predictive dreams and correct interpretation of dreams. He said to them, "Hear this dream which I have dreamed: behold, we were binding sheaves in the field, and lo, my sheaf arose and stood upright; and behold, your sheaves gathered round it, and bowed down to my sheaf." His brothers said to him, "Are you indeed to reign over us? Or are you indeed to have dominion over us?" So they hated him yet more for his dreams and for his words. Then he dreamed another dream, and told it to his brothers, and said, "Behold, I have dreamed another dream; and behold, the sun, the moon, and eleven stars were bowing down to me” (Gen.37:6-9, emphasis added). It means that not only his eleven brothers shall obey him because of his authority, but also their parents. Clearly, it was God’s will that one should lead and the others should follow despite initial resistance.

The realization of Joseph’s prediction came through his God-given ability to interpret anyone’s dreams, including that of Pharaoh’s of Egypt. In Gen.41:38-46, Pharaoh said to his servants, "Can we find such a man as this, in whom is the Spirit of God?" 39 So Pharaoh said to Joseph, "Since God has shown you all this, there is none so discreet and wise as you are; 40 you shall be over my house, and all my people shall order themselves as you command; only as regards the throne will I be greater than you." This is indeed the Pharaoh’s appointment that Joseph became the Prime Minister of the whole of Egypt.

Furthermore, Pharaoh said to Joseph, "‘Behold, I have set you over all the land of Egypt.’ Then Pharaoh took his signet ring from his hand and put it on Joseph's hand, and arrayed him in garments of fine linen, and put a gold chain about his neck; and he made him to ride in his second chariot; and they cried before him, ‘Bow the knee!’ Thus he set him over all the land of Egypt. Moreover Pharaoh said to Joseph, ‘I am Pharaoh, and without your consent no man shall lift up hand or foot in all the land of Egypt.’ And Pharaoh called Joseph's name Zaphenath-paneah; and he gave him in marriage Asenath, the daughter of Potiphera priest of On. So Joseph went out over the land of Egypt. Joseph was thirty years old when he entered the service of Pharaoh king of Egypt. And Joseph went out from the presence of Pharaoh, and went through all the land of Egypt” (Gen. 41:41-46, emphasis mine).

Joseph, in the presence of his brothers who cruelly sold him to the Ishmaelites, pointed out to God’s providential design. “So it was not you who sent me here, but God; and he has made me a father to Pharaoh, and lord of all his house and ruler over all the land of Egypt” (Gen.45:8).

Like him, St. Peter in the New Testament was appointed by God through His Son Jesus Christ, to be the leader of the New Israel or the spiritual twelve tribes of Jacob to save His people not anymore to save them from famine, but to give them food that comes from the mouth of God (Mt. 4:4) and the manna from heaven that is flesh, the true food that leads to eternal life (Jn.6:51).

B. Moses and His Teaching Authority over the Hebrew People

The second among the prototypes of Simon Peter is the prophet Moses, who came from among the Hebrew slaves in Egypt, privileged to be educated in the palace, and became God’s mighty instrument of liberation of Hebrews from slavery in Egypt. Through him, God spoke infallible words to rule His people in their wanderings in the desert of Sinai. Through the written and the oral Torah or Law, God’s chosen people knew what was God’s will for them to live holy lives, until the grace of God in Christ superseded it (Gal.3:24).

According to the accounts in Exodus, “Moses sat to judge the people, and the people stood about Moses from morning till evening. When Moses' father-in-law saw all that he was doing for the people, he said, ‘What is this that you are doing for the people? Why do you sit alone, and all the people stand about you from morning till evening?’ And Moses said to his father-in-law, ‘Because the people come to me to inquire of God; 16 when they have a dispute, they come to me and I decide between a man and his neighbor, and I make them know the statutes of God and his decisions’" (Ex.18:13,15-16). Here, Moses was the judge, another term for the leader, from whose mouth came God’s infallible decisions for God’s whole people. Since it was too exhausting to listen to everyone’s concerns, his concerned father-in-law, upon knowing Moses’ predicament suggested that Moses put up 70 minor judges to decide on minor issues while he (Moses) decide on the major ones. Therefore, Moses was clearly the supreme judge among the judges, just as in the New Testament, Peter was appointed the supreme leader among all the apostles.

Surprisingly, in Luke 10:1-2, Jesus also appointed 70 (in some versions, 72) disciples aside from the twelve apostles. Peter’s exercise of powerful leadership is found immediately after Christ’s Ascension (Acts 1) until Acts 15:7-11 when through his own mouth, God has decreed that the gentiles shall hear the gospel and believe. He infallibly decided that the gentiles are saved not by following the law of Moses but by the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Just as God made a covenant with the Israelites to become his chosen people (Exodus 19 and 20) in the huge rock, Mount Sinai, and wrote the law upon two tablets of stone, in the New Testament Jesus brought the 12 disciples in Caesaria Philipi, with the background of the massive rock mountain called Petra. It was in that place that Jesus proclaimed Simon to be the rock-foundation upon which the New People of God shall be built (Mt.16:18-19). This time, God’s law is not anymore written in tables of stone, but “on tablets that are hearts of flesh” (2 Cor.3:3; Jer.31;31-34; Heb.10:16).

In the book of Matthew, Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples, "The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses' seat; so practice and observe whatever they tell you, but not what they do; for they preach, but do not practice” (Mt.23:1-3). What this implies is that Moses sat as a supreme judge during his time. The New Testament teachers of the law and Pharisees succeded in the line of Moses; therefore, they have authority. Even Jesus recognized their teaching authority and urged people to follow what they say but not what they do. Peter, however, was installed by Jesus to be His duly appointed Prime Minister, a figure of Moses in the New Testament, who will judge or rule God’s people. Therefore, the Church recognizes this divinely instituted authority until today.

C. Eliakim - Vizier/ Prime Minister/ the one who was “over the house”

The third Old Testament to be considered as foreshadowing St. Peter’s role is Eliakim. Isaiah 22:20-22 reads, “In that day I will call my servant Eliakim the son of Hilkiah, and I will clothe him with your robe, and will bind your girdle on him, and will commit your authority to his hand; and he shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem and to the house of Judah. And I will place on his shoulder the key of the house of David; he shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open. And I will fasten him like a peg in a sure place, and he will become a throne of honor to his father's house. And they will hang on him the whole weight of his father's house, the offspring and issue, every small vessel, from the cups to all the flagons. In that day, says the LORD of hosts, the peg that was fastened in a sure place will give way; and it will be cut down and fall, and the burden that was upon it will be cut off, for the LORD has spoken" (important words are italicized for emphasis).

Some observations need to be spelled out here. First, it is God who calls the person to the office and the person responds. Eliakim was called by God just as Peter was called by Christ. Secondly, the office is that of servanthood. Eliakim was God’s servant, as Peter was in the New Testament, and as the Pope today is called the “servus servorum Dei” (servant of the servants of God). Thirdly, when Eliakim took the office of the King’s Prime Minister, taking the place of Shebna, that office is continuing, just as the office of the papacy existed from the first century onwards until Jesus comes again in glory. Fourthly, the authority God gave to Eliakim made him the “father” of the inhabitants of Jerusalem and Judah, St. Peter became a “father” (Greek Pappas, Pope) to St. Mark (1 Pet.5:13) and to all Christians. The Pope today continues that privilege. Fifthly, just as Eliakim was given the Key of the house of King David, Peter was given the Keys (plural) of the Kingdom of God by Christ the King (Matt.16:19), signifying that he was given authority by the King who himself holds the key or keys of his kingdom (Rev.1:18 – (keys); Rev.3:7 – (keys) Greek “kleis”; Rev.9:1 – (key); Rev.20:1 – (keys).

Sixthly, God Himself fastened Eliakim as an immovable peg in a sure place, Peter was pronounced by Jesus as Kephas (Aramaic, immovable rock) in John 1:42. Lastly, the whole glory (weight) of the house of Eliakim’s family will be upon him. If ever he becomes unfaithful to God, he and his family will suffer disaster. If ever Peter and his successor the Popes, will anger God, the whole Church will suffer disaster. This last characteristic suggests nothing against the infallibility of the Pope in pronouncing officially on faith and morals, but on his peccability, as a man tempted to commit sin. Yet, God promised through His divine grace, “I will fasten him as a peg in a sure place.” Jesus said to Peter, “And when you are converted, strengthen your brethren” (Lk.22:32).

D. The Prime Ministers of the Palace and their Succession of Office

The Prime Minister is called in the Sacred Scriptures by different titles: “over the house” (Heb.’al bayith/ beyth); “steward”; “majordomo”; “Master of the Palace” (according to the New Amercian bible); “vizier”. “And he sent Eliakim, who was over the household, and Shebna the secretary, and the senior priests, clothed with sackcloth, to the prophet Isaiah the son of Amoz” (Isa.37:2). “And King Uzziah was a leper to the day of his death, and being a leper dwelt in a separate house, for he was excluded from the house of the LORD. And Jotham his son was over the king's household, governing the people of the land” (2 Chron. 26:21).

Aside from Joseph, Moses and Eliakim, the succession of the different Prime Ministers in the Kingdom of Israel and Judah prefigure the office of Peter as the Prime Minister of Jesus, King of Kings and Lord of lords, in God’s Kingdom on earth, the Church. Just as today, Prime Ministers serve the Kingdom in behalf of the King, and the office does not end with his death or expulsion, God’s people in both the Old and New Testaments, have the unbroken succession of office. The following are:

1. (Ahishar during the reign of Solomon). “Ahishar was in charge of the palace; and Adoniram the son of Abda was in charge of the forced labor” (1 Kgs.4:6).

2. (Azra during the reign of King Elah). “His servant Zimri, commander of half his chariots, conspired against him. When he was at Tirzah, drinking himself drunk in the house of Arza, who was over the household in Tirzah, Zimri came in and struck him down and killed him” (1 Kgs.16:9-10).

3. (Obadiah during the reign of King Ahab). “Obadiah, who was over the household” (1 Kgs.18:3).

4. “And Jotham the king's son was over the household, governing the people of the land” (2 Kgs 15:5).

5. “And when they called for the king, there came out to them Eliakim the son of Hilkiah, who was over the household, and Shebnah the secretary, and Joah the son of Asaph, the recorder” (2 kgs 18:18).

It seems that the former Prime Minister Shebna was demoted to being a secretary.

E. The Old Testament High Priest and his permanent Office

Just as there was a divinely ordained High Priest in the Old Testament to ensure purity of doctrine and morals, the New Testament which is the perfection of the Old Testament, there was a divinely ordained High Priest in the Person of Christ (Heb.5:10). However, since Christ ascended into heaven, Christ appointed in the Church His visible leader and ambassador in the Person of Peter. Cardinal Gibbons wrote a lucid explanation on this topic of which the researcher wishes to add nothing more:

“…in the Old Law the High Priest appointed by the Almighty God filled an office analogous to that of the Pope in the New Law. In the Jewish Church there were Priests and Levites ordained to minister in the altar; and there was, also, a supreme ecclesiastical tribunal, with the High Priest at its head. All matters of religious controversy were referred to this tribunal and in the last resort to the High priest, whose decision was enforced under the pain of death. ‘if there be a hard matter in judgment between blood and blood, cause and cause, leprosy and leprosy…thou shalt come to the Priests of the Levitical race and to the judge….but he that…will refuse to obey the commandment of the priest, who ministereth at the time…that man shall die, and thou shalt take away the evil from Israel’”(Deut 17:8-12).

From the passage above it is evident that in the Hebrew Church the High Priest had the highest jurisdiction in religious matters. By this means unity of faith and worship was preserved among the people of God….Now the Jewish synagogue, as St. Paul testifies, was the type and figure of the Christian Church; for ‘all these things happen to them (the Jews) in figure’ (1 Cor.10:2). We must, therefore, find in the Church of Christ a spiritual judge, exercising the same supreme authority as the High Priest wielded in the Old Law. For if a supreme Pontiff was necessary in the Mosaic dispensation to maintain purity and uniformity of worship, the same dignitary is equally necessary now to preserve the unity of faith. (The Faith of our Fathers, pp.78-79).

Mga Kamalian ni Soriano sa 1 Juan 4

2009-08-21T00:17:00.000-07:00

SORIANO'S ERROR IN 1 JOHN 4

1 John 4:1-3 – 1 Mga minamahal, huwag kayong magsipaniwala sa bawa’t espiritu, kundi inyong subukin ang mga espiritu, kung sily’a sa Dios; sapagka’t maraming nagsilitaw na mga bulaang propeta sa sanglibutan.

2 Ditoy’ nakikilala ninyo ang Espiritu ng Dios: ang bawa’t espiritung nagpapahayag na si Jesucristo ay naparitong nasa laman ay sa Dios:

3 At ang bawa’t espiritung hindi ipinahahayag si Jesus, ay hindi sa Dios: at ito ang sa anticristo, na inyong narinig na darating; at ngayo’y nasa sanglibutan na.

6 Tayo nga’y sa Dios: ang nakakakilala sa Dios ay dumirinig sa atin; ang hindi sa Dios ay hindi dumirinig sa atin. Dito’y ating nakikilala ang espiritu ng katotohanan, at ang espitiu ng kamalian.

Komentaryo: Si Soriano pala ang tatamaan dito e. Una, kasi itinuturo niya na si Kristo “ay PARANG tao, pero hindi talaga tao”. Yan ang maling katuruan ng mga Gnostico ng 1st-3rd century sa early Church. Kaya binabalaan ni San Juan na huwag padadala sa Gnostikong katuruan na si Kristo ay esparto lamang, di-nagkatawang-tao. Yun nga ang itinuturo ni Soriano! Kasi hindi nagbabasa ng history yan, gusto nya ang history ay mag-ayon sa kanya. Pwede ba yun?

Pangalawa, sa talatang 6, sabi ni San Juan, ang nakakilala sa Dios ay nakikinig sa ATIN. Sinong ATIN YAN? Yan ang mga unang Kristyano na kasama ng mga Apostoles at ng kanilang mga tagsunod century after century till the end of time. Aside from Titus, Timothy, Barnabas, Mark, who were the 2nd generation Christians after the Apostles, sinong mga 3rd generation Christians and all those after them? TOTAL BLACK OUT NA dito si Soriano at mga Protestante! Wala kasi silang Church history kasi bagong salta lang ang kanilang iglesia! Pero ito assignment ko sa inyo: basahin nyo mga standard references like encyclopedia and world history at alamin kung sino sila St. Ignatius of Antioch, St. Ireneus, St. Polycarp na direct disciple of John the Beloved, mga early Church Fathers. O medyo marami na yan, baka di kaya ng mga utak nyo at magka-LBM kayo, ako pa ang may kasalanan nyan. Pero for the sake of the truth naman yan e, at added pa sa ating kaalaman para sa ating kaligtasan, mga pare ko.

O sige na, dito lang muna tayo magpaalam, kasi magpahinga na muna ako. Pasalamat tayo sa Dios sa ating hero na si Ninoy, at walang classes ako ngayon, kaya mabigyan ko naman kayo ng time ko, especially mga taga-Dating Daan.

May God bless us all. In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Amen!

(Next na mga Paksa ko, abangan nyo, mga kaibigan).

2 Tim.3:16-17 – Ang lahat ng mga kasulatan na kinasihan ng Dios ay mapapakinabangan din naman sa pagtuturo, sa pagsansala, sa pagsaway, sa ikatututo na nasa katuwiran:

Upang ang mga tao ng Dios ay maging sakdal, tinuruang lubos sa lahat ng mga gawang mabuti.

Santiago 1:4 – At inyong pabayaan na ang pagtitits ay magkaroon ng sakdal na gawa, upang kayo’y maging sakdal at ganap, na walang anoman kakulangan.

1. Acts 20:28 – Jesus who is God bought the church. For INC, Christ is only man.

2. Acts 20:28–30 some (not all) will introduce heresies – that’s Manalo! Total apostasy is a heresy concocted by Manalo, Mormons, SDA and the Protestants

Examination of the claims of Anti-Catholic Churches

a. Examination of INC’s claim for Rom.16:16 & Acts 20:28
3. Churches, not church (iglesia)
4. Cristo, not Filipino (Kristo) but Spanish
5. Roman Christians are Catholics
6. 1st cent. Christians ang tinutukoy, not 20th cent. Christians na dito lang nagsimula sa Pilipinas noong 1914. Kahit ano pang twist ni Manalo sa talata ng Isaaiah 46:11 na "Far East" daw.
7. INC is not Church of Christ because Christ did not establish it, but the Church of Manalo as evidenced by the SEC
8. Church, nagtalikod/ apostasized & be erected by Manalo? Where in that verse & the entire Bible? Mt. 16:18 – the powers of hell shall not overcome it. It’s either Jesus or Manalo was telling lies. Since Jesus could not tell lies, then it is Manalo who is telling lies!
9. Acts 20:28 – flock of God, not just Church of God as its name
10. Acts 20:28 – bishops – who has bishops but the Catholic Churc

BLATANT ERRORS OF SORIANO 2

2009-06-03T20:46:00.000-07:00

BLATANT ERRORS OF SORIANO
Ayon sa Biblia
(King James Version)

ANG PAGKAKAMALI NI SORIANO
SA KAHULUGAN NG LUKAS 1:1-4
Sinulat ni: Bro. Rey V. Entila
CFD – Diocese of Bacolod
(6/3/09)

Lk.1:3 – Ay minagaling ko naman, pagkasiyasat na lubos nga pangyayari ng lahat ng mga bagay mula nag una, na isulat sa inyong sunod-sunod, kagalanggalang na Teofilo;

- pinagdiinan ni Soriano na lahat ay isinulat na ni Lukas kaya suficiente na ang aklat ni Lukas para malaman ang lahat tungkol kay Kristo!

- Ha???!! Bago pa lang ako nakarinig sa buong buhay ko na ang isang tagapangaral ng Biblia - bantog at nag-claim pa na pantas daw at walang paltos magsalita ukol sa Biblia – ay makapagsabi ng ganitong walang kabuluhang mga pananalita!

- Kung ang aklat ni Lukas ay suficiente na, e bakit ang Biblias na pinapangaral mo ay 66 na aklat lahat? Sana nagprodyus ka na lang ng Soriano version ng Biblia mo na isang aklat lang, ayon lang kay San Lukas, hehe : )

- Tiyak ako na hindi lang mga Katoliko makakalaban mo rito kundi buong Kristiyanismo! Pati mga profeta, mga Apostol at si Kristo mismo makakalaban mo sapagka’t lahat sila ay nag-recognize ng autoridad nga Lumang Tipan at nag-quote mula roon!

- Pero, hindi ka original, kapatid na Soriano sa pagputol mo ng Biblia, may nauna na sa ‘yo noong ika-lawang siglo pa lamang. Pero hindi ka yata nagbabasa ng Church history e, but for the sake of truth na malaman mo at ng mga bumabasa ng blog na ito, si MARCION (A.D. 144) preacher din katulad mo at na-excommunicate ng Romano Katoliko ng siglong yaon, ay nagturo na ang Lumang Tipan ay dapat itakwil sapagka’t yan ay nagtuturo ng masamang Diyos. Para sa kanya, ang Bagong Tipan na dapat tanggapin ay sampu lamang. Mabuti sa kanya may sampu pa, sa iyo, kapatid na soriano, isa lang.

- E kung isang aklat na lang ang kay Soriano at ng kanyang mga mag-aaral, paano pa ba matatawag na Biblia yan? Sa rule ng grammar, by the way, ang isang aklat lang (Lukas, halimbawa) ay di pwedeng tawagin na “Biblia” (plural) kundi “Biblion” (singular). Nakakatuwa talaga ang aral ni Soriano, oo. Magaling magsalita pero kung siyasatin mo ang kanyang salita, e nonsense naman.

Verse 1 – Yamang marami ang nagpilit mag-ayos ng isang kasaysayan noong mga bagay na naganap sa gitna natin,

2 Alinsunod sa ipinatalos sa atin nilang buhat sa pasimula ay mga saksing nangakakakita at mga ministro nga salita,

3 Ay minagaling ko naman, pagkasiyasat na lubos nga pangyayari ng lahat ng mga bagay mula nag una, na isulat sa inyong sunod-sunod, kagalanggalang na Teofilo;

4 Upang mapagkilala mo ang katunayan tngkol sa mga bagay na itinuro sa iyo .

- Kung ating siyasating mabuti ang laman ng 1st four verses na isinulat ni San Lukas, HINDI ito nagpapahayag ng BIBLIA LAMANG (SOLA SCRIPTURA) na prinsipyo sa pag-aaral nga Biblia. HINDI mababasa iyan sa mga talata, kahit pagdiinan pa masyado nga basa ni bro. Willy Santiago. Ang mababasa ay mula sa APOSTOLIC TRADITION, ibig sabihin sa kasaysayan na ipinahayag nga mga SAKSI (mga Apostoles at mga disipulo), na-compile ni San Lukas at isinulat sa ilaim ng inspirasyong ng Banal na Espiritu ang mga nangyari at itinuro ni Kristo.

- Samakatuwid, ang talatang Lk.1:1-4 ay nagpapahayag ng, UNA, Apostolic Tradition, at IKALAWA, written Gospel ayon kay San Lukas. Kathang-isip lamang ni Soriano na walang Apostolic Tradition ditto sa talata, at puro nakasulat lamang.

- E kung sabihin ni Soriano - matapos malaman na may Apostolic Tradition pala talga na binasehan si San Lukas – na pagkatapos naisulat, hindi na kailangan ang Apostolic Tradition sa pagtuturo nga Ebanghelyo? Haha! That’s another unbiblical presupposition! Saan nakasulat diyan na pagkatapos isinulat ang Ebanghelyo, basahin na lang ng lahat? Wala.

- Kawawa naman ang mga karamihang tao ng panahong iyon – mga babae, mga bata, bulag, mga illiterate, hindi nila malalaman ang Ebanghelyo kasi di sila marunong bumasa. Kung ganito kaunti lang masyado maliligtas, ayon sa pamaraan ni Soriano.

- Nguni’t ang pamamaraan nis Soriano ay salungat sa pamamaraan ng mga naunang mga Kristiyano. Sila ay NAGTURO. Sa Lukas 1:4, ipinahayag ni Lukas na tinuruan ang kagalangalang na Teofilo. Hindi lamang bumasa si Teofilo sa Lumang Tipan o ng mga naunang sulat bago sumulat si Lukas, kundi siya ay TINURUAN. Sino ang nagturo sa kanya? Di ang mga may autoridad magturo (Magisterium) sa Iglesia, primarily mga Apostol.

- O mga kapatid, at bro. Soriano, nakita mo na na ang prinsipyo na Sola Scriptura (Biblia Lamang) na kinopya mo lang kay Ginoong Nicolas Perez, na kinopya niya rin kay Felix Manalo, na kinopya ni Felix sa kanyang mga guro na Adventista, Metodista at sa Church of Christ, na kumopya lamang sa mga 16th century Protestant Reformers (Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, Oecolampadius, Melancthon, Munzer, atbp). Doon nagsimula ang MALING prinsipyo na ‘yon.

- Sana maliban sa masusing pagsasaliksik ng Bibliya, saliksikin mo rin, kapatid na Soriano ang Church history, kung saan ba talaga galling ang mga kamaliang ito, at imbento lang pala ng taong tulad mo. E kung ayaw mo magbasa ng Church history upang malaman mo at nang iyong mga fans ang mga nangyari noon, you are prone to forever repeat the errors of the past. Maraming mga kaluluwa ang mapapahamak. Kawawa naman, kapatid.

(end of article)

BLATANT ERRORS OF SORIANO

2009-06-03T20:41:00.000-07:00

BLATANT ERRORS OF ELISEO SORIANO
Ayon sa Biblia
(King James Version)

ANG PAGKAKAMALI NI ELISEO SORIANO
SA KAHULUGAN NG 1 CORINTO 4:6
Sinulat ni: Bro. Rey V. Entila
CFD – Diocese of Bacolod(6/3/09)

1 Corinto 4:6 – Ang mga bagay ngang ito, mga kapatid, ay inianyo ko sa halimbawa sa aking sarili at kay Apolos dahil sa inyo; upang sa amin ay mangatuto kayo na huwag magsihigit sa mga bagay na nangasusulat; upang ang sinoman sa inyo ay huwag magpalalo ang isa laban sa iba.

- Ito yata ang pinaka-proof text ni bro. Eliseo Soriano upang ipagtanggol ang kanyang pang-taong tradisyon na namana kay Nicolas Perez, Felix Manalo at sa mga ika-16 na siglong Protestant Reformers.

- Paulit-ulit sa kanyang mga programa sa telebisyon, ito ang talata na naging kanyang “material principle” sa “Itanong Mo Kay Soriano, Biblia ang Sasagot”. Pero, ang tanong, e “Nasiyasat mo bang mabuti, kapatid na Soriano, na ang talata sa 1 Cor.4:6 ay kailan ma’y hindi nagtuturo tulad ng iyong itinuturo na Biblia lamang (Bible alone?)”. Hehe, marahil sa buong programa mo, hindi pa naitanong ito.

- “huwag magsihigit sa mga bagay na nangasusulat” – do you notice na ang tense ng verb (pandiwa) diyan ay past tense (pangnagdaan), lumipas na? Strictly speaking, si Apostol Pablo ay tumutukoy sa Lumang Tipan, di ba? Kung ito ang proof text mo, kapatid, malinaw na dapat sa Lumang Tipan ka lang magbase ng pag-aaral mo! What a poor text for Sola Scriptura principle! Kaya nga hindi kailanman pwede itong maging proof-text ng mga Protestante, Dating Daan at mga iba’t-ibang kulto nga Kristiyanismo e.

- Kung sasabihin mo, kapatid na Eliseo Soriano, na tumutukoy din si San Pablo sa mga “future writings”, saan sa talata doon? Ikaw na yata ang sumobra sa mga nakasulat e, haha. Ikaw mismo ang nag-violate ng iyong sariling paninindigan!

- Di ba sinabi mo pa na huwag natin dagdagan o kulangan man ang mga nakasulat (Rev.22:19)? E bakit nagdagdag ka pa ng “at sa mga sulat na darating” ayon sa argumento mo sa akin noon? Kung hindi nga sinabi ng Catholic Church kung ano ang official list o canon ng Bagong Tipan na 27 books e, wala ka ring alam kung ano yun, kasi di sinulat at di inisa-isa ni Pablo ang mga iyon.

- Sa totoo lang, dapat basahin natin muna ang nakasaad sa Chapter 4 ng Unang Corinto. Sinulat ni San Pablo sa verse 1 “Ipalagay nga kami ng sinoman na mga ministro ni Cristo, at mga katiwala ng mga hiwaga nga Dios”. Ano ba ang ibig sabihin nito, na bilang mga MINISTRO ng Dios, ang Gawain nila ay MAGSUSULAT lamang at ipabasa sa mga mananamplataya, at huwag lumampas sa mga nakasulat? Masyadong malayo naman yan sa diwa ng mga Apostol at ng kasulatan! Ang katotohanan ay sila’y may autoridad sa Pagturo (Magisterium) at di lamang sa inspiradong pagsulat. Iyan ang iniutos ni Cristo bago Siya umakyat ng langit na magsihayo, magpangaral (preach) at magturo (teach) nga Ebanghelyo sa lahat ng sangkataohan (Mk.16:15; Mat.28:18-20).

- to reduce the teaching authority of the Apostles sa PAGSUSULAT lamang at walang buhay na oral teaching (Magisterium) ay isang pagtuturo na sumusalungat sa turo ni Cristo at ng mga Apostoles mismo!

- Sa verse 6 sinabi ni San Pablo: “upang sa AMIN ay mangatuto kayo”. Hindi lamang sa mga nakasulat matuto ang mga taga-Corinto (Cristiyano) kundi sa halimbawa at pamumuhay Cristiyano din ni San Pablo at Apolos matuto ang lahat. Kung sa mga nakasulat lang, kulang yun. Kaya nga sumulat ulit si san Pablo sa kanila, kasi marami pa silang dapat matutunan sa bukambibig niyang pagtuturo at sa kanyang sulat, NGUNI’T HINDI sa kanyang sulat lamang.

- Sa verse 15, itinuro ni Pablo na may mga GURO ang mga taga-Corinto (o mga Cristiyano), nguni’t siya ay kanilang ama (spiritual, not carnal father, that’s why priests are also “spiritual fathers” following the example of St. Paul). Ano ba ang ginagawa nga ama, sumusulat lang bas a kanyang mga anak? Hindi, naman po, di ba? Considering the oral culture of their time, direct oral teaching was very much effective, rather than writing occasionally. Kaya sa Deut.6:7 iniutos: “At iyong ituturo ng buong sikap sa iyong mga anak…” Kaya ang Catholic Church ay totoong sumusunod sa mga turo at halimbawa ng mga Apostol at nga kanilang mga sinulat.

- Sa verse 17 SINUGO ni San Pablo si Timoteo na kanyang anak (spiritual son) na magpaalaala (oral teaching) sa kanila,

- “gaya ng ITINUTURO ko saan mang dako sa bawa’t iglesia”. Si San Pablo pala ay nagtuturo ( oral preaching, or, see Magisterium) sa BAWA’T iglesia, hindi sumusulat lamang.

- Konklusyon: Ang 1 Cor.4:6 na proof-text mo, kapatid na Eliseo Soriano, para ipangaral ang mali at nabase sa pan-taong tradisyong “Bible Alone/ Sola Scriptura/ Biblia Lamang” ay hindi kailanman makatutulong sa iyong maling doktrinang ito. On the contrary, 1 Cor.4:6, kung basahin sa buo niyang konteksto, ay sumasang-ayon sa 2,000 years na turo nga Iglesia Katolika, mula pa kay Hesukrtisto, sa kanyang mga Apostoles, sa mga successors ng mga Apostoles na mga Obispo sa buong mundo, na ang pagtuturo nga kaligtasan ay nabase sa NAKASULAT (BIBLE) at sa autoridad sa PAGTUTURO (MAGISTERIUM) ng Santa Iglesia Katolika.

(end of the article)

Errors of Eliseo Soriano vs Rey Entila

2009-05-25T03:52:00.000-07:00

Mga Kamalian ni Eliseo Soriano vs Rey Entila

Sa Unang Gabi ng Dialogue
Sinulat ni Bro.Rey Entila
Catholic Faith Defender, Bacolod City

First in series:

Kung di lang pagputol-putulin ng mga taga-ADD ang video episode ng unang gabing tinanong ko si Eliseo Soriano, malalaman ng lahat na HINDI nasagot ni Eliseo Soriano ang mga tanong ko, kundi nag-eevade lamang at nagmumura.

For the sake of fairness on my side and that of Eliseo Soriano, and for the knowledge of all concerned, I am personally writing this series as my time and availability permit me. Iniimbitahan ko ang lahat, Katoliko man o Dating Daan o Protestante, na basahin at subaybayan ito at makapulot ng mga mahalagang KATOTOHANAN. Wala lang tayong personalan, trabaho lang.

1. Tinanong ko si Eliseo Soriano: “Sapagkat isa sa kanyang mga programa ay pinamagatang “Itanong Mo kay Soriano, Biblia ang Sasagot”, kung saan sa Biblia, anong Kapitulo at Versiculo makikita na nakasulat na mayroong 27 at 27 lamang na mga aklat sa Bagong Testamento?”

Umigting ang mga ugat sa leeg ni Eliseo Soriano nang marining niya ang tanong ko. Buong lakas at galit na sumigaw-sigaw na “impertinente na tanong ‘yan!”

Haha! Kung hindi niya pala masagot sa pamamagitan ng na-memorize nya na mga talata sa Bibliya, “impertenente” agad! Pero hindi impertenente ito. Ito ay napaka-importante na tanong, mas importante kaysa mga tanong ng mga taong hindi nakapag-aral sa Bible school o sa Teolohiya.

Kung ang tao ay talagang marunong sa Bibliya, alam niya ang tinatawag na mga “internal evidence” (from the Bible itself) at “external evidence” (from reliable outside sources) ng Bibliya, di ba? Napag-aaralan yan sa mga Bible at Theology schools, bakit kaya ayaw sagutin ni Eliseo Soriano ang tanong ko?

Madali lang naman sagutin yan para sa mga taong nakikining na, katulad ng mga Ebanghelyo, HINDI nakasulat ang kanilang pangalan sa versiculo na sila (Mateo, Markos, Lukas, at Juan) talaga ang sumulat nga particular na Ebanghelyo, HINDI rin naisulat nga kahit isang inspired New Testament writer kung ano talaga ang bilang ng mga inspiradong aklat nga Bagong Tipan. Period. Pero dito malaman ng mga nanonood ang Katotohanan na, katulad na ang Iglesya Katolika ang nagproklama na ang Ebanghelyong ito ay si San Mateo ang sumulat, at ito naman ay sinulat ni Markos, o Lukas o Juan, the same Catholic Church proclaimed that there are 27 and only 27 books in the New Testament! Kaya pinipili lang pala ni Eliseo Soriano ang mga tanong na dapat niyang sagutin.

Malamang takot si Eliseo Soriano sagutin ito sapagka’t ang sagot ay patungo sa KATOTOHANAN na ang nagproklama na may autoridad galing kay Kristo (Mt.16:18-19 at Mt.18:17-18) ay ang TOTOONG iglesya na itinatag ni Kristo, ang iglesya ni Kristo (see Catechism of the Catholic Church par. 832) na siya lamang ang may palataandaan na “Katoliko” (Universal, see Mt.28:19-20), na mayroon lamang 27, walang labis at walang kulang, na mga kinasihan na aklat sa Bagong Tipan na dapat paniwalaan at ilathala sa buong mundo.

Kung hindi alam ito ni Eliseo Soriano, I’m really SORRY for him, kasi ito’y pinaka-BASIC na kaalaman na itinuturo sa mga mag-aaral ng Bibliya tungkol sa topiko na CANON (official list) of the Bible. Nakakagulat malaman ito, ano po? Na si Soriano na nagpapakitang pantas ay walang alam dito, kaya galit na galit siya na baka malaman ng lahat.

Kung sino mang Protestante o miyembro ni Eliseo Soriano o Katoliko man, na gustong malaman itong katotohanan, dapat magsaliksik sa mga aklat ng mga dalubhasa at mga experto tulad ng mga nasa Encyclopedia at mga reference books o sa internet man, tungkol sa CANON OF THE BIBLE. Makikita mo na consistent sa 27 aklat nga Bagong Testamento ang mga early Christians, hindi lamang iisang Kristiyano, kundi buong Konsilyo nga mga Opisyal ng Simbahan sa Hippo (393 A.D), Carthage (387 A.D) sa Africa samantalang ang bantug na si San Agustin ay Obispo roon. Sa Roma (382 A.D) si Pope Damasus nagsugo sa bantug na si St. Jerome (d.420 A.D) na magsalin ng Hebreo at Griegong Biblia tungo sa Latina (Vulgata). Tila yata, hindi alam ito ni Eliseo Soriano, o gusto lang mag-eskapo sa katotohanang ito.

Ito ang halimbawa ng mga prueba: “The 27 books of the New Testament received by the Christians were proclaimed in 397 A.D. and was officially declared in the year 405 A.D.” (Collier’s Encyclopedia Vo. IV, p.117).

Ang ama ng Protestantismo na si Martin Luther (d.1546) ay sumulat: “We are obliged to yield many things to the Papists (Catholics) – that they possess the Word of God which we received from them, otherwise we should have known nothing at all about it.” (Commentary on St. John, Ch.16).

ANG KATOTOHANAN AY ANG SANTA IGLESYA KATOLIKA ANG NAGPROKLAMA NA MAY BUONG AUTORIDAD GALING KAY HESUKRISTO, NA MAY 27 AT 27 LAMANG NA AKLAT ANG BAGONG TESTAMENTO.

Tatlong puntos ang dapat pagdiinan ditto:

Una, ang programa ni Eliseo Soriano na pinapamagatang “Itanong mo kay Soriano, Bibliya ang sasagot”, ay HINDI KAILANMAN makakasagot ng tanong bakit LAHAT NG MGA KRISTIYANO na may Bibliya ay gumagamit ng 27 na aklat ng Bagong Tipan, samantalang wala namang nakasulat na 27 aklat ang dapat paniniwalaan.

Ikalawa, ang pamagat ng programa ni Eliseo Soriano ay nababase sa mali na 16^th century man-made (see Mt.15:3,7; Mk.7:9; Col.2:8!) Bible Alone (Sola Scriptura) principle, ang prisipyo na gumawa ng sobra 33,000 sekta, denominasyon at mga kulto, sapagka’t maliban na WALANG TALATA na nakasulat na Bibliya LAMANG, ito ay di pinaniniwalaan ng mga Kristyano sa isang libo’t limandaang taon ng Kristiyanismo, at salungat sa sentido kumon (common sense) na ang napakahalagang aklat tungo sa kaligtasan ay pumunta lamang sa mga kamay ng mga taong nagbigay-kahulugan ayon lamang sa kanilang SARILING pangkahulugan (bawal sa 2 Pet.1:20-21).

Ikatlo, si Eliseo Soriano naman ay talagang palabasa ng mga current events at mga sulat tungkol sa siyensia (science), nguni’t HINDI MAIKUBLI NA Mahina o Malabo siya sa kasaysayan ng Kristiyanismo. Kung sana magawa niyang hindi maging biased sa pagbabasa ng katotohanan, sana magbukas ang mga mata niya na ANG MISMONG INAATAKE NIYANG IGLESYA KATOLIKA ay siyang nag-compile, nagdepende at nagproklama ng Bibliya na may 27 aklat nga Bagong Tipan na siyang nilalathala ni Eliseo Soriano sa mga tao.

(end of article)

Ipagpatuloy sa susunod na serye...

Note: This is a standing challenge to Dating Daan Members and to their Founder Bro. Eliseo Soriano to ANSWER this first issue on the CANON OF THE BIBLE. Kung hindi ninyo masasagot ito, o mabigyan man ng makatotohanang sagot base sa mga ebidensya at hindi lamang mga KURO-KURO o bulay-bulay ni Eliseo Soriano, MALALAMAN ng LAHAT na IMPERTENENTE at walang kwenta ang mga aral at programa ni Eliseo Soriano.

Itong condition natin, mga members ng ADD. Sagutin nyo ang bawa’t article na sinusulat ko, at huwag lumabas sa tema ng article through other topics like purgatory, larawan ng mga santo, Virgin Mary, Santo Papa, etc, o mga personal na mga atake at pagmumura na dala yata sa technique ng boss nyo, pero AGAINST THE RULES OF FORMAL DEBATES (kaya ayaw kong makipag “debate” sa kanyang style na puro sigaw at mura lang aabutin ko, unless sa neutral ground na hindi sa teritoryo ninyo) May panahon din sa mga topikong ganyan, kaya isa-isahin lang natin para maliwanag kung sino ang nagsasabi ng totoo.

Tandaan nyo, mga pare ko sa Dating Daan: Lahat ng mga sagot nyo, ilalabas sa blog ko at ng mga kasama ko. Kaya kunting pag-iingat at paghihinahon bago sumagot sa article ko. 2 ½ pages lg article ko ngayon on the proclamation by the Catholic Church on the canon of 27 books of the New Testament, kaya, sagutin nyo rin nga 2 1’2 pages, ok?

God bless us all!

_____________________________________________________________

Ang tungkol sa 2 Thess.2:15 on Apostolic Tradition na hindi rin nasagot ni Eliseo Soriano ay tatalakayin ko sa mga susunod na issue.

Ang pangalawang gabi ng muntik na akong umuwi kasama at dalawa kong kasama, dahil isang oras bago kami nag-dialogue ni Eliseo Soriano, isang oras kaming nakaistambay sa labas ng pintuan ng studio, lahat ng mga miyembro ni Eliseo Soriano pinag-utosan ng gwardia sa malakas na tinig, na magsuot ng kanilang mga I.D.s, na para bagang kaming walang I.D ay malaman agad. Sa labas walang humpay na pagmumura at demoralizing na pananalita ang pinagtatapon sa akin ni Danny Navales, na kung sasagutin ko siya, lalo siyang nagagalit, lumalakas ang tinig at nauubusan ng paciensiya. Pinipilit pa ako pinapainom ng isang basong tubig ng mga kasamahan nila sa ADD, kahit nagsasabi akong ayaw ko. Ininom ng pinsan ko at nagka-LBM siya pagdating sa bahay niya.

Iproduce nyo nga ang videong iyan na walang pagbabago at pagputol-putol! Simula nang pagpasok pa lang namin sa studio hanggang bumaba kami pauwi nakunan ng video. Sige, iproduce nyo yan upang malaman ng lahat kung paano ako at mga kasama ko pinagmura, binastos at pinag-demoralize ng mga miyembro ng Ang Dating Daan, especially ni Danny Navales, bago nanglalantang humarap kay Eliseo Soriano sa telebisyon.

Mabuti na inumpisahan nyong inungkit ang 2 episodes na yan kay Eliseo Soriano. Kasi, sa inyo lahat ng power, autoridad at oras sa studio nung una, dito sa Internet, patas na tayo.

Tatalakayin ko sa susunod na mga panahon ang 2^nd night of dialogue with Eliseo Soriano and I will point out his gross errors in interpreting for SOLA SCRIPTURA the verses: Isa.34:16; Lk.1:1-4; 1 Jn.1:1-4; Rom.15:4; 1 Cor.4;6; Mt.18:15-18 at iba pa.. Exciting ito, mga pare ko. Kahit yung pangkahulugan niya na Jeremiah.16:16 ay mali rin.