Magaral Tayo

A litmus test for any religious group is the credibility of its founder in making his claims. Felix Manalo?s credibility and, consequently, his claims, are impossible to take seriously. He claimed to be "God?s messenger," divinely chosen to re-establish the true Church which, according to Manalo, disappeared in the first century due to apostasy. It was his role to restore numerous doctrines that the Church had abandoned. A quick look at Manalo?s background shows where these doctrines came from: Manalo stole them from other quasi-Christian religious sects.

Manalo was baptized a Catholic, but he left the Church as a teen. He became a Protestant, going through five different denominations, including the Seventh-Day Adventists. Finally, Manalo started his own church in 1914. In 1919, he left the Philippines because he wanted to learn more about religion. He came to America, to study with Protestants, whom Iglesia would later declare to be apostates, just like Catholics. Why, five years after being called by God to be his "last messenger," did Manalo go to the U.S. to learn from apostates? What could God?s messenger learn from a group that, according to Iglesia, had departed from the true faith?

The explanation is that, contrary to his later claims, Manalo did not believe himself to be God?s final messenger in 1914. He didn?t use the last messenger doctrine until 1922. He appears to have adopted the messenger doctrine in response to a schism in the Iglesia movement. The schism was led by Teogilo Ora, one of its early ministers. Manalo appears to have developed the messenger doctrine to accumulate power and re-assert his leadership in the church.

This poses a problem for Iglesia, because if Manalo had been the new messenger called by God in 1914, why didn?t he tell anybody prior to 1922? Because he didn?t think of it until 1922. His situation in this respect parallels that of Mormonism?s founder Joseph Smith, who claimed that when he was a boy, God appeared to him in a vision and told him all existing churches were corrupt and he was not to join them, that he would lead a movement to restore God?s true Church. But historical records show that Smith did join an inquirer?s class at an established Protestant church after his supposed vision from God. It was only in later years that Smith came up with his version of the "true messenger" doctrine, proving as much of an embarrassment for the Mormon church as Manalo?s similar doctrine does for Iglesia.

Read more here and here.

Link: http://janchung.tripod.com/

The Deceptions of Iglesya ni Kristo

Link: http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/1990/9002fea1.asp

Ang artikulong ito'y tungkol sa karanasan ni Karl Keating, isang Katolikong Amerikano na nakipagdebate kay Joe Ventilacion ng Iglesya Ni Kristo. Basahin ang isang sampol ng kanilang palitan tungkol sa pangalan ng Iglesya. Sulat ni Keating:

My favorite example concerns the translation of scriptural passages which supposedly included the name of his sect. This is a major issue with Iglesia members. They believe the Bible mentions their church by name. They desperately want to find the phrase "Church of Christ" in the sacred text.

Their argument is facile: "What is the name of Christ?s church, as given in the Bible? It is the 'Church of Christ.' Our church is called the 'Church of Christ.' Therefore, ours is the church Christ founded."

Not many people will be impressed with such an argument--when it was first presented to me during a question and answer period some years ago, I had trouble not laughing aloud--but the folks at the debate thought it made a lot of sense. The problem was that the verse Ventilacion was citing didn't contain the phrase "Church of Christ." I read to him the Greek and said, "It means 'Church of God,' not 'Church of Christ.'"

"That?s your opinion," he said.

"No, it?s not. That's what the Greek says."

"That?s your opinion."

"If you want to know what a verse really means, you need to look at the Greek, because the text of the New Testament is in Greek."

"That?s your opinion," he repeated, smiling broadly.

"No, it?s not my opinion. It?s a fact."

"That?s your opinion."

Pamilyar ang style di ba? Basahin ang buong artikulo dito. Ito pa ang isa.. Isa pa: INC Deceptions.

Isa sa mga katawa-tawang interpretasyon sa Bibliya ng mga ministro ng Iglesya ni Manalo ay ang kanilang paliwanag tungkol sa deklarasyon ni Tomas tungkol Panginoon: "Panginoon ko at Diyos ko!" (Juan 20:28). Sa kanilang paliwanag ay makikitang ang mali nilang paniniwala tungkol sa kalikasan ng Kristo ang nagdadala ng kanilang pang-unawa sa mga talata ng Banal na Kasulatan.

Read more »

Akala ko'y makakarinig ako ng magandang paliwanag mula kay Jun Ventilacion tungkol sa pangalan ng kanilang Iglesya. Nguni't ako'y nagkamali.

Ipinakikilala si Jun Ventilacion na isa sa pinakamaalam na ministro ng Iglesya ni Kristo dahil nakapag-aral daw siya sa Israel ng mga linggwahe ng bibliya. Kanina'y pinag-usapan sa programa ng Net25 ang pangalan ng Iglesya ni Kristo. Ito ba ang pangalan ng Iglesya?

Read more »

Bibliya lang daw ang dapat na basehan ng pananampalatayang Kristiyano. Pero kung titingnan natin ang mga grupong nagsasabi ng ganyan, mapapansing kahit sila mismo ay hindi magkatugma sa kani-kanilang pananampalataya. Kung bubuksan mo ang TV at Radio, maririnig mo pa silang nagbabangayan at tumutuligsa sa bawa't isa. Hindi mahirap hulaan kung sino ang mga yan. Iglesya ni Manalo, Iglesya ni Ka Eli Soriano, Grupo ni Quiboloy, at ang iba't ibang grupong "Born Again." Lahat ng iyan ay nagsasabing ang kanilang mga pananampalataya'y naka-base lamang sa Bibliya, nguni't kung tutuusi'y naka-base sa TURO ng isang taong kanilang kinikilalang Anghel o Sugo o Paham o Anak ng Diyos.

Kung Bibliya lang ang basehan ng pananampalataya, kahit sino ay maaaring magtayo ng sariling "Iglesya" tulad ng kaso ni Felix Manalo. Ang grupo ng Ang Dating Daan ay nanggaling sa isang break-away group ng mga Iglesya ni Kristo. At kahit si Eli Soriano ay nagpapa-legitimize pa na ang kanyang Iglesya ng Diyos ay siya ring Iglesya ng Diyos ni Nicolas Perez.

Ang mga Born Again ay may bagong pauso: nais nilang ipakita sa mundo na sila'y iisang pananampalataya lamang. Ang totoo niya'y napakarami nilang magkakaiba at magkakasalungat na mga turo. Si Apollo Quiboloy ay nagmula sa kanilang mga ranggo, nguni't hindi naman nila matanggap na si Quiboloy ngayon ang "Son of God."

Ang lahat ng nabanggit ay katulad ng mga imitasyon ng mga "brand names" na ating nakikita sa Divisoria o kaya'y sa mga sidewalk ng Cubao. Nakakuha sila ng mga miyembro dahil nga ang mentalidad ng panahon ay bumabagay sa kanila: "kung hindi mo kaya ang orihinal, punta ka sa imitasyon -- mura na, madali pang palitan." Kaya nga ang mga miyembro ng mga grupong nabanggit ay papalit-palit ng "pananampalataya".

Sa totoo lang, hindi naman talaga pananampalataya ay nakikita sa kani-kanilang paraan ng pagbasa ng Bibliya. Ang tawag sa kanila ay mga "biblical rationalists". "Rationalist" dahil reduktibo at mapag-pili ang kanilang pananaw; mga "biblical rationalist" dahil para sa kanila'y nasa bibliya na lahat ang dapat malaman.

Kahit ang bibliya mismo'y pinasusubalian sila sapagka't kahit si Apostol San Pablo mismo'y magsasabi na hindi lamang ang nasusulat kundi "lahat ng iyong (kay Timoteo) nakita at natutunan sa akin (kay Pablo)" ang batayan ng pananampalataya, sa madaling sabi, Kasulatan at Tradisyon ng mga Apostol, tulad ng nakikita sa nag-iisang Iglesya Katolika.

Para sa karagdagang paliwanag, basahin ang aking "The Word of God and Scriptures" isang artikulong sinulat ko bilang paliwanag sa salitang "Word of God" (Logos tou Theou) at ang relasyon nito sa "Mga Kasulatan".

Para sa INK, sa grupo ni Quiboloy, at sa mga sekta at kultong itinuturing na mga Kristiyano (e.g. Born Again) mahalagang doktrina ang pagtalikod ng Iglesyang itinayo ni Kristo.

Read more »