"Do you believe in the (sic) modern prophet?"
These were the words my cousin Brent asked me a few days ago through text. And because I wasn't that sleepy yet then, I decided to respond to his message not through text, but through writing.
Brent,
As suggested by the article "the", it is implied that you are talking about a particular person, or in this case, a prophet, as the noun is in its singular form: "the modern prophet". By then I would say, "No, I don't." Why?
In the Church's nearly two millenia of blessed existence, there had been countless heretics who led Christians astray from the pristine Catholic faith, as foretold by Matthew 24:5. Some of them claim to be the modern prophet, who, allegedly, have received divine revelations from our God. Some, like Joseph Smith Jr. (1805-1844), the founder of "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints", which regards him as "the prophet of restoration (Joseph Smith.net, 2010)".
Here in the country, there are some people who are like him, too. One is Ptr. Apollo Carreon Quiboloy (1950-) from the Restorationist "Kingdom of Jesus Christ, The Name Above Every Name", who does not only claim to be God's prophet, but His own "appointed son (Kingdom of Jesus Christ.org)".
Another is Felix Ysagun Manalo (1886-1963) of the Iglesia ni Cristo (sic), whom the INC holds as "God's Messenger in These Last Days (Wikipedia, 2012)", claimed to be the "ravenous bird" described in Isaiah 46:11 (who is actually Cyrus the Great of Persia), and the "fourth angel" in the book of Revelation. His church also claims that they were "re-established" because the Catholic Church "strayed away from the pristine faith (This is the Iglesia ni Cristo, 1977)".
By "modern", I suppose you mean the time since the apostolic era. The three men I mentioned above lived more than a thousand years after the time of the Church Fathers, and all of them have established different "Christian" churches which, of course, hold on to some different doctrines.. Like all other 32,000 Christian confessions around the world, their churches hold their leaders/founders as their "modern prophet", like what Smith is to the Mormons and so on.
These so-called prophets used the 66-book "Bible" (the original Catholic Bible has 73) to support their varying claims about themselves and how God "foretold" their existence. They used the supposedly unifying agent as a divisive one, which, of course, Jesus did not want (John 17:21).
These prophets have followers, some who became pastors/ministers. They interpret the Bible on their own, not according to how the Church Jesus established upon St. Peter, 2,000 years ago, does so (Mt. 16:18).
I would have said "yes" if you replaced "the" with "a", or made it like "Do you believe in modern prophets?" All Christians should be modern prophets, that is, by proclaiming God's greatness, love, and mercy to all the ends of the earth. Not to start a schism, but to bring them to God's family here on earth, the One (1 Cor 1:10), Holy (Eph 5:27), Catholic (Mt 28:19), and Apostolic (Mt 16:18, 28:20) Church. When we were baptized, we shared in the threefold mission of Our Lord Jesus Christ as king, priest, and prophet. We ought to do our part until our last breath.
But until then, it is a "no". Why would I believe in people (and their teachings) ought to divide the Church?
I do hope this long post has answered your question. I would be happy to answer more some time.
May God bless you and your family, now and forever.
Wednesday, July 11, 2012
Sunday, May 27, 2012
Think Beyond the Box
Even before Stefani Joanne Angelina Germanotta , or Lady Gaga, set foot on Philippine soil to hold her concert here, nagpahayag na ang ilang religious movements ng kanilang pagtutol sa pag-perform dito ng isang artistang may mga awiting diumano ay lumalapastangan sa pananampalatayang Kristiyano at mga music video which exhibit sensual and other sensitive scenes. Nandiyan ang iba't-ibang uri ng protesta sa kung saan-saan; sa Facebook, sa email, sa text. at may nagsagawa pa nga ng mobilizations. All of them will to cancel the performer's concert in the country.
Which all left me dismayed in one point and disappointed in another. Una sa lahat, even though the Philippines is a predominantly Catholic-Christian country, such a concept of "state religion" doesn't exist here. A de facto religion maybe, which is Catholicism, but it is not the official religion. Id est, walang karapatan ang sinoman na pigilan ang mga ganitong uri ng pagtatanghal just because it offends religious feelings. Indonesia is an Islamic country kaya naipagbawal ang concert doon. Sa loob nga ng bansa kahit kapag walang concert, may heavy metal songs aired on radio na tahasang nagsasabing anti-Christ ang kumakanta (o sumisigaw?). Mayroon ding lantarang offending of religious feelings between two "Christian" sects with seemingly different orientations (in fact, may mga programa ang dalawang grupong ito on air which feature converts from the opposite sides). Marami pang kahalintulad din nito in different forms, pero the question is, why are these still alive kung "kontra" sila sa bastusan ng paniniwala?
Maybe Articles 132 and 133 of the Revised Penal Code (s. 1930) are enough to protect the different beliefs here in the country. Besides, hindi naman nag-concert si Lady Gaga sa loob ng simbahan o sinagoga, ni nanghimok ng mga mananampalataya na manood sa kaniya at makinig while she "insults" Christianity. Her fans went on their own, her concert wasn't even promoted heavily. Kung ang isinisigaw ng mga nagpo-protesta ay hindi nila hahayaang maipamana sa kanilang mga anak ang "imoralidad" ng tinaguriang "Mother Monster", then so be it. If their spiritual and/or biological children (who, presumably, watched the concert) have been deeply rooted in the faith, siguro naman, kahit si Satanas pa mismo ang mag-concert sa SMX, walang magbabago sa pananampalataya ng mga bata. Just like the story of Job in the Old Testament, kahit pinahihina na ng kaniyang mga kaibigan ang kaniyang pagtitiwala sa Diyos, he remained steadfast to his faith and was rewarded. And Our Lord, too, when He was tempted by the devil, naging matibay siya at hindi nagpadala sa tukso, then the angels attended to Him. Siguro this is God's way of testing the faith of the Christians who were there in the concert. And this, too, is His way of building His Church stronger.
Equivocated daw ang mga kanta ni Lady Gaga and one must not simply interpret these songs in plain view. Well as you know, interpretations vary, sa Bible pa nga lang ehh. Kaya from One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, there are now more than 30,000 Christian sects and denominations. So we'd better leave the interpretation to her and her team, besides, sila ang talagang nakakaalam kung ano ang ibig-sabihin ng mga kanta and MV's. Pero if we'd stick to our own interpretations, let the faith be a greater positive number and let the songs and videos be a lesser negative number, para kapag pinagsama, positive pa rin ang result. It's up to the Church and the person himself to make that faith grow more and more each day, mula sa isang maliit na positive number, to perhaps a bigger one than the number before faith got tested.
Lady Gaga is a Catholic at isinusulong ng ilang nagmamarunong that she be excommunicated from the Church. We should leave these things to the Canon Lawyers, the Curia, and to His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI himself. Marami pang kailangang pagdaanan ang motion for excommunication. Of course the case must be heard for a number of times with both sides explaining, then proceeding with the verdict. Hindi dahil against siya sa ilang tuntunin at pamantayan ng Santa Iglesia, excommunication na agad. Remember the story of Jesus and the sinful woman who was about to be stoned to death. Remember and reflect before you throw that stone to Lady Gaga.
To end (whoo, finally), I am not a fan of the pop icon neither am I against my Mother, the Church. I just don't see the point, really, why her concert was about to be banned. Just let faith shine stronger than what you call sin. Remain steadfast in what you believe in and let this faith thrive in your children para walang palag ang kung anomang impluwensiya sa kanila.
And to those who think, time and time again, that the whole Church is being an extremist, please do think again, at huwag niyo namang sabihing idiot ang Simbahan sa Bibliyang dahil sa kaniya ay nag-exist. Think twice, thrice... seventy-seven times before you say things on air, online, and in print. Hindi rin divided ang Iglesiya sa bagay na ito, the Church is just too big and we are working on evangelizing each and every one to have the same mindset as ours.
I am a devout Catholic and I love my God, so do I love His Church. I just think beyond the box and hope everyone does the same before commenting on a certain issue.
Which all left me dismayed in one point and disappointed in another. Una sa lahat, even though the Philippines is a predominantly Catholic-Christian country, such a concept of "state religion" doesn't exist here. A de facto religion maybe, which is Catholicism, but it is not the official religion. Id est, walang karapatan ang sinoman na pigilan ang mga ganitong uri ng pagtatanghal just because it offends religious feelings. Indonesia is an Islamic country kaya naipagbawal ang concert doon. Sa loob nga ng bansa kahit kapag walang concert, may heavy metal songs aired on radio na tahasang nagsasabing anti-Christ ang kumakanta (o sumisigaw?). Mayroon ding lantarang offending of religious feelings between two "Christian" sects with seemingly different orientations (in fact, may mga programa ang dalawang grupong ito on air which feature converts from the opposite sides). Marami pang kahalintulad din nito in different forms, pero the question is, why are these still alive kung "kontra" sila sa bastusan ng paniniwala?
Maybe Articles 132 and 133 of the Revised Penal Code (s. 1930) are enough to protect the different beliefs here in the country. Besides, hindi naman nag-concert si Lady Gaga sa loob ng simbahan o sinagoga, ni nanghimok ng mga mananampalataya na manood sa kaniya at makinig while she "insults" Christianity. Her fans went on their own, her concert wasn't even promoted heavily. Kung ang isinisigaw ng mga nagpo-protesta ay hindi nila hahayaang maipamana sa kanilang mga anak ang "imoralidad" ng tinaguriang "Mother Monster", then so be it. If their spiritual and/or biological children (who, presumably, watched the concert) have been deeply rooted in the faith, siguro naman, kahit si Satanas pa mismo ang mag-concert sa SMX, walang magbabago sa pananampalataya ng mga bata. Just like the story of Job in the Old Testament, kahit pinahihina na ng kaniyang mga kaibigan ang kaniyang pagtitiwala sa Diyos, he remained steadfast to his faith and was rewarded. And Our Lord, too, when He was tempted by the devil, naging matibay siya at hindi nagpadala sa tukso, then the angels attended to Him. Siguro this is God's way of testing the faith of the Christians who were there in the concert. And this, too, is His way of building His Church stronger.
Equivocated daw ang mga kanta ni Lady Gaga and one must not simply interpret these songs in plain view. Well as you know, interpretations vary, sa Bible pa nga lang ehh. Kaya from One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, there are now more than 30,000 Christian sects and denominations. So we'd better leave the interpretation to her and her team, besides, sila ang talagang nakakaalam kung ano ang ibig-sabihin ng mga kanta and MV's. Pero if we'd stick to our own interpretations, let the faith be a greater positive number and let the songs and videos be a lesser negative number, para kapag pinagsama, positive pa rin ang result. It's up to the Church and the person himself to make that faith grow more and more each day, mula sa isang maliit na positive number, to perhaps a bigger one than the number before faith got tested.
Lady Gaga is a Catholic at isinusulong ng ilang nagmamarunong that she be excommunicated from the Church. We should leave these things to the Canon Lawyers, the Curia, and to His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI himself. Marami pang kailangang pagdaanan ang motion for excommunication. Of course the case must be heard for a number of times with both sides explaining, then proceeding with the verdict. Hindi dahil against siya sa ilang tuntunin at pamantayan ng Santa Iglesia, excommunication na agad. Remember the story of Jesus and the sinful woman who was about to be stoned to death. Remember and reflect before you throw that stone to Lady Gaga.
To end (whoo, finally), I am not a fan of the pop icon neither am I against my Mother, the Church. I just don't see the point, really, why her concert was about to be banned. Just let faith shine stronger than what you call sin. Remain steadfast in what you believe in and let this faith thrive in your children para walang palag ang kung anomang impluwensiya sa kanila.
And to those who think, time and time again, that the whole Church is being an extremist, please do think again, at huwag niyo namang sabihing idiot ang Simbahan sa Bibliyang dahil sa kaniya ay nag-exist. Think twice, thrice... seventy-seven times before you say things on air, online, and in print. Hindi rin divided ang Iglesiya sa bagay na ito, the Church is just too big and we are working on evangelizing each and every one to have the same mindset as ours.
I am a devout Catholic and I love my God, so do I love His Church. I just think beyond the box and hope everyone does the same before commenting on a certain issue.
Thursday, January 12, 2012
Another Call for Defense
Sa totoo lang, I'm so, so fed up with all these people who're trying to bring the whole Catholic Church down by her simple mistakes and shortcomings. Ang stereotypical, sobra. I can't blame them (some of them were proven to be atheists kaya hindi na rin ako nagulat), though, may mali naman kasi sa simbahan na kailangan nang ayusin.
RH Bill, for the nth time
As I write this, oo, suyang-suya na rin ako.
The question is simple: "Bakit ka sisiping sa kama kung ayaw mong magka-anak?" And is supplemented, "Bakit mo ipagpapalit ang maayos na pamumuhay ng anak mo para sa sandaling 'kaligayahan' ?"
These advocates want to propagate immorality, and extinction. Think of this, kung maisasabatas ang RH Bill, then magiging trivial na ang carnal relations. At kapag naging trivial na, it won't be sacred anymore: yes, it is sacred because God made it so. At away from His approved manner, say, extra and pre-marital sex, one commits sin.
So what do we want to do, educate the people and convince them not to engage in such activities daily? Yes. It's possible, only immoral people say it isn't.
If this bill would forever be outlawed, then mag-iisip na 'yung mga mag-asawa to abstain from marital activities. And I suppose pati 'yung mga hindi mag-asawa, mag-a-abstain din?
And I suppose this question would be raised: "Eh paano 'yung minors who engage in these activities?" Oo, alam nating lahat na ineligible pa for detention ang mga menor-de-edad. Siguro, to resolve this na lang muna ang atupagin naman sana ng mga kongresista, hindi na lang 'yung puro anti-planking, anti-angry birds. Psh.
Benedict XVI on salvation
I am this open-minded Catholic na hindi talaga matanggap ang idea of exclusive salvation (kaya nga I've had numerous clashes with a friend na talagang ipinagpipipipipipipilitang sila nga lang talaga ang ililigtas sa araw ng paghuhukom) bago ko pa mabasa 'yung "Is there salvation outside the Catholic Church?" sa Know Your Faith published by St. Paul's bookstore na there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church; because the Catholic Church, by its namesake, includes all humanity.
And then, with the help of a friend, I read from dailymail.co.uk:
"Pope Benedict XVI declared yesterday that Christian denominations other than his own were not true churches and their holy orders have no value.
"The claims came in a document, from a Vatican watchdog which was approved by the Pope.
"It said the branches of Christianity formed after the split with Rome at the Reformation could not be called churches "in the proper sense" because they broke with a succession of popes who dated back to St Peter.(Caldwell, 2007)"
Then arose speculations na sinasabi raw ng Santo Papa na ang Santa Iglesia Catolica lang ang maliligtas. What? Ang sinasabi lang, the Catholic Church (Mt 28:19) was instituted by Christ upon St. Peter the Apostle (Mt 16:18) who was its first pope, whose position was then assumed by Benedict XVI after 264 successions, so all other churches aren't true, kasi they are built by men(and in fact, magkakaproblema kapag hindi inirehistro sa Securities and Exchange Commission), not by our Lord.
Marriage among the homosexuals and infertile
RH Bill, for the nth time
As I write this, oo, suyang-suya na rin ako.
The question is simple: "Bakit ka sisiping sa kama kung ayaw mong magka-anak?" And is supplemented, "Bakit mo ipagpapalit ang maayos na pamumuhay ng anak mo para sa sandaling 'kaligayahan' ?"
These advocates want to propagate immorality, and extinction. Think of this, kung maisasabatas ang RH Bill, then magiging trivial na ang carnal relations. At kapag naging trivial na, it won't be sacred anymore: yes, it is sacred because God made it so. At away from His approved manner, say, extra and pre-marital sex, one commits sin.
So what do we want to do, educate the people and convince them not to engage in such activities daily? Yes. It's possible, only immoral people say it isn't.
If this bill would forever be outlawed, then mag-iisip na 'yung mga mag-asawa to abstain from marital activities. And I suppose pati 'yung mga hindi mag-asawa, mag-a-abstain din?
And I suppose this question would be raised: "Eh paano 'yung minors who engage in these activities?" Oo, alam nating lahat na ineligible pa for detention ang mga menor-de-edad. Siguro, to resolve this na lang muna ang atupagin naman sana ng mga kongresista, hindi na lang 'yung puro anti-planking, anti-angry birds. Psh.
Benedict XVI on salvation
I am this open-minded Catholic na hindi talaga matanggap ang idea of exclusive salvation (kaya nga I've had numerous clashes with a friend na talagang ipinagpipipipipipipilitang sila nga lang talaga ang ililigtas sa araw ng paghuhukom) bago ko pa mabasa 'yung "Is there salvation outside the Catholic Church?" sa Know Your Faith published by St. Paul's bookstore na there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church; because the Catholic Church, by its namesake, includes all humanity.
And then, with the help of a friend, I read from dailymail.co.uk:
"Pope Benedict XVI declared yesterday that Christian denominations other than his own were not true churches and their holy orders have no value.
"The claims came in a document, from a Vatican watchdog which was approved by the Pope.
"It said the branches of Christianity formed after the split with Rome at the Reformation could not be called churches "in the proper sense" because they broke with a succession of popes who dated back to St Peter.(Caldwell, 2007)"
Then arose speculations na sinasabi raw ng Santo Papa na ang Santa Iglesia Catolica lang ang maliligtas. What? Ang sinasabi lang, the Catholic Church (Mt 28:19) was instituted by Christ upon St. Peter the Apostle (Mt 16:18) who was its first pope, whose position was then assumed by Benedict XVI after 264 successions, so all other churches aren't true, kasi they are built by men(and in fact, magkakaproblema kapag hindi inirehistro sa Securities and Exchange Commission), not by our Lord.
Marriage among the homosexuals and infertile
Threat naman talaga kasi to humanity ang homosexual marriage. So tell me, how would population grow if we tolerate this kind of marriage? Well, the Bible doesn't say anything about what should not be done in marriage, it says what has to; man and woman, then create children. Tapos. If the Philippine government allows homosexual marriage, basta 'wag lang nilang pilitin ang Catholic priests to witness.
At isa pa, 'yung kasal among the infertile. Retired Archbishop Oscar Cruz once "said" that people who are unable to create must not marry; they will only commit sin in front of God.
Ako man, sa una, nagulat. Kasi I remembered Elizabeth and Zachary, John the Baptizer's parents. The woman was infertile, but she and her husband gained favor in the eyes of God.
Maybe the retired priest meant something beyond the layman's definition of "marriage", I don't know. Besides, try to research about that issue, 'yung pagbabawal ng Catholic Church sa mga baog na magpakasal, I believe you'd only come up with one site which has the exactly similar content you are looking for.
Marami pang ibang napakaliit na issue na susubukan kong pag-aksayahan ng panahon para sa mga mag-aaksaya ng panahong basahin 'to.
Sana naman, there must be mutual respect ammong beliefs and faith. Pero I'll be happy to answer more of these issues, hangga't kaya ko. I won't assume to know what I don't; besides, mas marami pang may kayang sagutin lahat ng mga isyung 'to.
To end, sana naman stop stereotyping. Look at the entire picture before you react (kaya nga medyo matagal rin bago ko 'to naisulat), hindi 'yung magre-rebelde ka sa sarili mong simbahan simply because you think you're brilliant.
Wednesday, September 14, 2011
The Catholic Truth: Tradition Over the Bible
I've had a friendly discussion with a Born Again Christian pastor not so long ago. Of course, as an aspiring Augustinian Recollect priest, I had many questions and raised several topics which made the discourse last for nearly half an hour.
One of the two topics I liked the most in our discussion was about the Tradition and the Bible (the other was on salvation). He said that the Catholic church has "moved out" of the Biblical doctrines, giving strange terms and performing such extra-doctrinal rites. He added that the Baptist church sticks to "Bible over Tradition" while the Catholic Church does otherwise.
I've been living my life from that day thinking that what he said was wrong, until when I began to realize the truth in what the pastor said. Well, that is not because I'm giving up my faith.
It's because of the Protestant misconception and wrong definition of Tradition that makes the Catholic Church "very extra-Biblical," though normal human logic should make the former thankful to the latter.
One of the two topics I liked the most in our discussion was about the Tradition and the Bible (the other was on salvation). He said that the Catholic church has "moved out" of the Biblical doctrines, giving strange terms and performing such extra-doctrinal rites. He added that the Baptist church sticks to "Bible over Tradition" while the Catholic Church does otherwise.
I've been living my life from that day thinking that what he said was wrong, until when I began to realize the truth in what the pastor said. Well, that is not because I'm giving up my faith.
Tradition, defined in the Catholic way, is the teaching authority (Magisterium) of the Holy Catholic Church (Mt. 16:18, Mt. 28:19-20). Before, there was no Bible to speak of. There were writings yes, but they were safeguarded by Christian communities who were hiding from the Romans thus, making the scriptures limited to the people. They weren't kept in caves or somewhere else which other "Christians" tell they were.
It's this: without the Catholic Tradition, we could not have availed of the Bible today. As you know, the word "Bible" comes from the Greek word "βιβλιος" which means "book." Mind you, the word "Bible" doesn't exist in any of the 73 books of the Bible. So, if the Catholic Tradition made it possible for a collection of divinely-inspired writings to be named as the "Bible", then the Tradition also made it possible to provide the name "Catholic" ("καθολικός": universal) for Christ's universal church (Mt. 28:19).
Also, it is because of Catholic tradition that we come to know the 73 books of the Holy Bible. And I know that the Catholic Bible has a seven-book "excess" over the Protestant, which has only 66. Before the Lutheran revolt in 1517, the Catholic Christian Bible (the Latin, or Vulgate edition, as compiled and translated by St. Jerome) has originally 73 books, and was later deducted by Luther. And in one of those seven books is where the concept "purgatory" can be found.
It's this: without the Catholic Tradition, we could not have availed of the Bible today. As you know, the word "Bible" comes from the Greek word "βιβλιος" which means "book." Mind you, the word "Bible" doesn't exist in any of the 73 books of the Bible. So, if the Catholic Tradition made it possible for a collection of divinely-inspired writings to be named as the "Bible", then the Tradition also made it possible to provide the name "Catholic" ("καθολικός": universal) for Christ's universal church (Mt. 28:19).
Also, it is because of Catholic tradition that we come to know the 73 books of the Holy Bible. And I know that the Catholic Bible has a seven-book "excess" over the Protestant, which has only 66. Before the Lutheran revolt in 1517, the Catholic Christian Bible (the Latin, or Vulgate edition, as compiled and translated by St. Jerome) has originally 73 books, and was later deducted by Luther. And in one of those seven books is where the concept "purgatory" can be found.
 |
| St. Jerome working on the Biblia Sacra Vulgata (c) paintinghere.com |
Monday, June 27, 2011
The EUCHARIST
Catholics differ from other Christians mainly because of the way of remembering the Last Supper. Others refer to the bread and wine as "symbols," but we refer to it as the real Body and Blood of Jesus Christ.
They say that the sacrifice of Christ is a one-time act and cannot be repeated, hence, the bread their spiritual leaders break and distribute are merely symbols.
But, which is really true, according to the Bible?
Jesus, during the Last Supper, said:
“Take this and eat it, for this is my body.
Each of you drink from it, for this is my blood, which confirms the covenant between God and his people."
(Mt. 26:26-28; mod)
Then take a look at this part of St. Paul's first letter to the Corinthians
" For I pass on to you what I received from the Lord himself. On the night when he was betrayed, the Lord Jesus took some bread and gave thanks to God for it. Then he broke it in pieces and said,“This is my body, which is given for you. Do this to remember me.” In the same way, he took the cup of wine after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant between God and his people—an agreement confirmed with my blood. Do this to remember me as often as you drink it.” For every time you eat this bread and drink this cup, you are announcing the Lord’s death until he comes again.
So anyone who eats this bread or drinks this cup of the Lord unworthily is guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord."
(1 Cor 11:23-28 NLT, emphasis mine)
See? The first Christians shared Christ's Body and Blood, not the symbol.
Yet there were some Christians who modified the Bible just for their doctrine to be correct. Nevertheless, it's still wrong.
If the bread they break is the symbol of the bread we Catholics receive during communion, well that's another case.
They say that the sacrifice of Christ is a one-time act and cannot be repeated, hence, the bread their spiritual leaders break and distribute are merely symbols.
But, which is really true, according to the Bible?
Jesus, during the Last Supper, said:
“Take this and eat it, for this is my body.
Each of you drink from it, for this is my blood, which confirms the covenant between God and his people."
(Mt. 26:26-28; mod)
Then take a look at this part of St. Paul's first letter to the Corinthians
" For I pass on to you what I received from the Lord himself. On the night when he was betrayed, the Lord Jesus took some bread and gave thanks to God for it. Then he broke it in pieces and said,“This is my body, which is given for you. Do this to remember me.” In the same way, he took the cup of wine after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant between God and his people—an agreement confirmed with my blood. Do this to remember me as often as you drink it.” For every time you eat this bread and drink this cup, you are announcing the Lord’s death until he comes again.
So anyone who eats this bread or drinks this cup of the Lord unworthily is guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord."
(1 Cor 11:23-28 NLT, emphasis mine)
See? The first Christians shared Christ's Body and Blood, not the symbol.
Yet there were some Christians who modified the Bible just for their doctrine to be correct. Nevertheless, it's still wrong.
If the bread they break is the symbol of the bread we Catholics receive during communion, well that's another case.
Tuesday, June 21, 2011
Does GOD really EXIST?
If you happen to read this, then congratulations! You are sincere in your search for the truth about God and His existence. Read on and I hope that I might help you in choosing to believe in Him, or continue in being faithful to Him.
As a FUTURE Order of the Augustinian Recollect seminarian, I don't doubt the existence of God.
I created this entry so that the average person who is somehow confused about his and his church's norms, may be directed in the right path, regardless of sect.
I won't explain mainly by using Bible verses, because I assume that most of you won't really search for those paragraphs in the Scriptures, given that most of you use logic.
Well for believers and unbelievers alike.
Jesus Christ (Iesvs Christi) is not a mythical creature, but a legendary being. Legendary, which means that history and religion agree that He really existed, thousands of years ago.
And knowing that He is real, He gave the proof of the existence of God.
"No one has actually seen God [the Father], but the one and only Son (Jesus), who is Himself God and is in closest relationship with the Father, has made Him known, (Jn 1:18)" for Jesus and the Father are one (Jn 10:30).
Obviously, the Bible talks about God teaching His people (Old Testament) and His Revelation and Salvation through Christ Jesus (New Testament).
Now, you might ask, "How true are these writings?"
Hmm, the Bible didn't actually fall right out of the sky, nor did it rise from the ground by itself. You see, it is a compilation of the books written by people, through careful and keen study, inspired by God Himself (2 Tim 3:16).
Science is too young to understand religion. Not all what science knows are enough to explain how Jesus was conceived, how He multiplied five loaves and two fishes, how He brought many dead people back to life, how St. Peter got out from prison, et cetera.
GOD EXISTS. It's a fact. Prove me wrong.
As a FUTURE Order of the Augustinian Recollect seminarian, I don't doubt the existence of God.
I created this entry so that the average person who is somehow confused about his and his church's norms, may be directed in the right path, regardless of sect.
I won't explain mainly by using Bible verses, because I assume that most of you won't really search for those paragraphs in the Scriptures, given that most of you use logic.
Well for believers and unbelievers alike.
Jesus Christ (Iesvs Christi) is not a mythical creature, but a legendary being. Legendary, which means that history and religion agree that He really existed, thousands of years ago.
And knowing that He is real, He gave the proof of the existence of God.
"No one has actually seen God [the Father], but the one and only Son (Jesus), who is Himself God and is in closest relationship with the Father, has made Him known, (Jn 1:18)" for Jesus and the Father are one (Jn 10:30).
Obviously, the Bible talks about God teaching His people (Old Testament) and His Revelation and Salvation through Christ Jesus (New Testament).
Now, you might ask, "How true are these writings?"
Hmm, the Bible didn't actually fall right out of the sky, nor did it rise from the ground by itself. You see, it is a compilation of the books written by people, through careful and keen study, inspired by God Himself (2 Tim 3:16).
Science is too young to understand religion. Not all what science knows are enough to explain how Jesus was conceived, how He multiplied five loaves and two fishes, how He brought many dead people back to life, how St. Peter got out from prison, et cetera.
GOD EXISTS. It's a fact. Prove me wrong.
Sunday, June 19, 2011
Blessing (v.)
The statement "God bless you" is commonly used by people, obviously, giving blessing, by the Most Holy Name of the LORD. And the LORD commanded His people not to use His Name in vain (Ex 20:7; Dt 5:11). So the question is, does saying "God bless you" violate His commandment?
There are two answers, depending on the conditions.
No, when the blessing is given by someone who is in the state of grace, and channelling God's blessings by saying the words with a clear conscience and a happy, peaceful heart.
Yes, when the blessing is given by someone who is not in the state of grace, and merely saying the words for granted, making the people see him following Christ's command about forgiveness (Mt 5:44; Lk 6:28), which is the opposite of the actual case; that he is just saying those words, regardless of the anger he has.
How can one be a channel of blessing without being in the state of grace, or merely, sincerely giving the blessing? You know, it's not a simple endnote you put on anything you publish, whether you really mean what you say or not.
And by merely saying "God bless you" without sincerity, you commit sin. A grave sin.
(ERRATUM: Before October 30, 2012, Philippine Standard Time, the answers "yes" and "no" were incorrectly placed. I'm very sorry about that.)
There are two answers, depending on the conditions.
No, when the blessing is given by someone who is in the state of grace, and channelling God's blessings by saying the words with a clear conscience and a happy, peaceful heart.
Yes, when the blessing is given by someone who is not in the state of grace, and merely saying the words for granted, making the people see him following Christ's command about forgiveness (Mt 5:44; Lk 6:28), which is the opposite of the actual case; that he is just saying those words, regardless of the anger he has.
How can one be a channel of blessing without being in the state of grace, or merely, sincerely giving the blessing? You know, it's not a simple endnote you put on anything you publish, whether you really mean what you say or not.
And by merely saying "God bless you" without sincerity, you commit sin. A grave sin.
(ERRATUM: Before October 30, 2012, Philippine Standard Time, the answers "yes" and "no" were incorrectly placed. I'm very sorry about that.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)