Showing posts with label Bible and Church. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bible and Church. Show all posts

Friday, August 5, 2011

PAGDEFENSA SA CREDEBILIDAD NG BIBLIA





Ancient goatskin bible in Kibran Gebriel Church (Bahir Dar) at Lake Tana Monasteries in Ethiopia





Anonymous
said...



Good day father..
may nakasagutan ako n friend ko sa Facebook

ang lagay sabi nya di daw Credible ang BIble..

kc
sa napakaraming version nito at sabi nya sa akin sure k bang walang
version n walang dagdag bawas,,,sabi ko wala naman talaga kc mas
naniniwala ako sa Douay Rheims kesa sa ibang version like King james
version n dinagdagan ng ni Luther n "faith alone " at binawasan nila ng 7
deuterenomical books samantalang tayo hindi..

sabi nya how sure daw ako eh di naman daw ako nabuhay kasama ang mga apostle,,


sabi nya..

only the apostles can prove the preciseness of the scripture, you are not an apostle

nakakaloka father





sabi daw gaya gaya daw tayo sa Koran??



shane po .tnx










Fr. Abe, CRS
said...

 






[Good day father..
may nakasagutan ako n friend ko sa Facebook

ang lagay sabi nya di daw Credible ang BIble..]

SIYA ANG HINDI CREDIBLE. FOR SURE HINDI NIYA ALAM ANG PINAGSASABI NIYA. HE HE HE

[kc sa napakaraming version nito at sabi nya sa akin sure k bang walang version n walang dagdag bawas,,,]

KUNG
MERONG DAGDAG BAWAS E DI PATUNAYAN NIYA. IPAKITA NIYA SA IYO ANG MGA
ORIGINAL HEBREW, ARAMAIC AND GREEK TEXTS OF THE BIBLE AND POINT OUT
WHICH WERE ADDED OR REMOVED FROM THE TEXT.

HINGAN MO SIYA NG PROOFS PARA SA KANYANG ACCUSATIONS. KUNG WALANG MAIPAKITA E DI HAKA-HAKA LANG ANG KANYANG PINAGSASABI.


[sabi
ko wala naman talaga kc mas naniniwala ako sa Douay Rheims kesa sa
ibang version like King james version n dinagdagan ng ni Luther n "faith
alone " at binawasan nila ng 7 deuterenomical books samantalang tayo
hindi..]


ANG PROTESTANTS ANG NAGBAWAS NG 7 BOOKS AT NAGDAGDAG NG "FAITH ALONE" SA LETTER TO THE ROMANS.

TAYONG
CATHOLICS AY NAI-PRESERVE NATIN ANG INTEGRITY NG BIBLE DAHIL NASA ATIN
ANG PINAKAMATATANDANG KOPYA NITO AT MALINAW NA NAPRESERVE NATIN ANG
KAHULAGAN NG BIBLIA.

KUNG GUSTO NIYA ANG EXACTO E DI BASAHIN
NIYA ANG BIBLIA SA ORIGINAL LANGUAGES. BAKIT SIYA NAGBABASE SA
TRANSLATIONS? ALAM NA NGA NIYANG TRANSLATIONS LANG ANG MGA IYON.

[sabi nya how sure daw ako eh di naman daw ako nabuhay kasama ang mga apostle,,

sabi nya..

only the apostles can prove the preciseness of the scripture, you are not an apostle]

THIS
IS STUPID AND ILLOGICAL. HISTORICALLY, THE APOSTLES HANDED ON THE
SCRIPTURES TO THE RECIPIENTS - THE CHURCH MEMBERS OF THAT TIME. THEY
PASSED THEM AND TAUGHT THE NEXT GENERATIONS THEIR CORRECT INTERPRETATION
AND THE FAITH. SO THE CHURCH PASSED THAT SAME FAITH AND THAT DOCUMENT FROM ONE GENERATION
TO THE OTHER.

IT IS ILLOGICAL TO CLAIM THAT ONLY THE AUTHORS OF
THE TEXTS CAN PROVE THE TEXT CORRECTLY. O NO, NO, NO... THERE ARE ALSO
THE PEOPLE TO WHOM THE AUTHORS GAVE THE TEXTS AND EXPLAINED THE TEXTS.

IF
THAT IS THE CASE ONLY THE FRAMERS OF THE CONSTITUTIONS CAN PROVE THE
TRUE MEANING OF THE CONSTITUTIONS. THAT IS STUPID. IT WILL DESTROY
JURISPRUDENCE AND ALSO EDUCATION WHEREIN MANY TEACHERS ARE USING
TEXTBOOKS AUTHORED BY OTHERS.

[nakakaloka father]

BALIW SIYA KAYA WAG KANG MATAKOT. WAG KANG MAGPA LOKA SA KANYA. IPAKITA MO SA KANYA ANG KANYANG KABALIWAN.

[sabi daw gaya gaya daw tayo sa Koran??]

TANGA
PALA SIYA E. MAS NAUNA ANG BIBLE NATIN KESA SA KORAN. HA HA HA... THE
MOSLEMS BELIEVE THAT ALLAH'S REVELATION TO MOHAMMAD IN QUR'AN STARTED
AROUND 610AD. HE HE HE... THE NEW TESTAMENT WAS COMPLETED AT THE END OF
1ST CENTURY AD. HA HA HA... AND THEY WERE COMPILED INTO ONE BOOK BY THE
CATHOLIC CHURCH DURING THE 3RD CENTURY AD. HA HA HA... SO NAUNA ANG
BIBLE FOR ABOUT 500 YEARS.

TIGNAN MO ANG KATANGAHAN NIYA AT KASINUNGALINGAN.

[shane po .tnx]

WELCOME SHANE AND GOD BLESS YOU. 




Wednesday, February 2, 2011

SOLUTIONS FINDER THAT CANNOT FIND SOLUTIONS: A Response to Gerry Soliman by Atty. Marwil Llasos

The Council of Trent


Oops, Gerry Soliman did it again! With the habit that he is very much accustomed to, he pitted one Catholic apologist against another. This time he pits me against Mr. Carlos Antonio Palad on when the Canon of Scriptures was “finally” settled. While waiting for his “counterargument” that he said he’d work over the weekend and while he is enjoying the “funny stuffs” with regards to the Scriptures, let me just show how Gerry Soliman again falters in his “divide and rule” tactic. [http://solutions-finder.blogspot.com/2011/01/when-was-canon-of-scriptures-finally.html].

He quoted my obiter dictum in my article published in Mr. Isahel Don Alfonso’s blog http://catholiceternaltruth.blogspot.com/:

In his obscene haste to discredit the Roman Catholic Church, Mr. Gerry Soliman conveniently forgot that the canon of Scripture, both the Old and New Testament, was finally settled at the Council of Rome in 382 A.D., under the authority of Pope Damasus I and was reaffirmed on numerous occasions such as the Council of Hippo in 393 A.D. and at the Council of Carthage in 397 A.D. Pope Innocent I reaffirmed the canon in 405 A.D. in a letter to Bishop Exuperius of Toulouse.

He also quoted the response of Mr. Carlos Antonio Palad posted in http://thesplendorofthechurch.blogspot.com/2010/03/first-response-to-gerry-soliman-on.html:

Like I said, it was the Council of Trent that gave dogmatic force to the Catholic Canon of Scripture. As any informed Catholic knows, this is the equivalent of stating – as the good ol’ New Catholic Encyclopedia, which I devoured during my college days, does – that it was Trent that gave final form, or “definitively settled,” the Catholic Canon of Scripture. Prior to Trent, Local Councils and Popes had identified and taught the Canon of Scripture, but not with dogmatic force, and not with anathemas or excommunications. Therefore, the Canon technically remained open, but historically and in fact – and this should give Mr. Soliman pause -- between Carthage III and Trent, between which there is a distance of more than 1,100 years, there is no difference regarding the Canon.

And thereupon, Mr. Gerry Soliman danced in glee for what he termed as “an obvious contradiction.” He pointed out that I stated that the canon was "finally settled" in 382 AD but Mr. Soliman paraphrased Mr. Palad that the final form was made at Trent of the 16th century.

Here it must be pointed out that Mr. Soliman’s reading comprehension again failed him. I was saying that the canon was “finally settled” in 382 A.D. at the Council of Rome. Mr. Palad was saying that the Council of Trent gave the canon its final form or “definitively settled.” Again, where is the contradiction?

When I said “finally settled,” I meant that all the 27 books of the New Testament Canon were already in, as in it was a final list because no books have been added thereto or subtracted therefrom. And this list or canon, as I stated was subsequently “reaffirmed” on numerous occasions; hence, implying that it was not yet “definitive” or, as has dogmatic force for Catholics. But the list was already there as early as 382 A.D.! Mr. Palad said basically the same thing: “Prior to Trent, Local Councils and Popes had identified and taught the Canon of Scripture, but not with dogmatic force, and not with anathemas or excommunications.”

Mr. Soliman said that he did “think the phrase, the Canon technically remained open, from Mr. Palad is far different than the phrase, finally settled, from Atty. Llasos.” He went on to argue: “If it was technically remained open, then common sense will tell you that it is not finally settled.” Sorry, Mr. Soliman but your common sense failed you. My use of “finally settled” simply meant that the list of the 27 books of the New Testament were in by 382 A.D. in the Council of Rome. Finally settled because no other books would be added to it or deducted from it. The 27 NT books are the same books we have now.

Mr. Palad explained his statement that “the Canon technically remained open” in the sense that it had no “dogmatic force, and not with anathemas or excommunications.” I was aware that despite the final list (no more dagdag-bawas), questions continued to crop regarding the canon of Scripture until its definitive or authoritative settlement for Catholics once and for all in the Council of Trent. That is why I mentioned that the decision in the Council of Rome in 382 A.D. “was reaffirmed on numerous occasions such as the Council of Hippo in 393 A.D. and at the Council of Carthage in 397 A.D. Pope Innocent I reaffirmed the canon in 405 A.D. in a letter to Bishop Exuperius of Toulouse. The second Council of Carthage in 419 A.D. reaffirmed the canon of its predecessors and asked Pope Boniface to “confirm this canon, for these are the things which we have received from our fathers to be read in church.” This went on until Trent definitively, authoritatively, dogmatically and infallibly put an end to it.

.My article was concerned with the New Testament canon of which the Book of Revelation is a part. I made the point that it is absurd to demand for an official or infallible interpretation of the “woman” in Revelation 12 when the very canonicity of the Book of Revelation itself was being disputed at that time (at least during the first 300 years of Christianity, based on Gerry Soliman’s timeline).

After the New Testament canon (which included the Book of Revelation) was fixed, Marian interpretation of Revelation 12 began to emerge. That was precisely the same point of Dr. Tim Perry, author of Mary for Evangelicals: “It is not surprising, therefore, to find that Marian interpretation of Revelation 12 begins in the fifth century, after the New Testament canon is fixed. As part of the New Testament Canon, Revelation’s depiction of the heavenly woman completes the biblical Marian material” [Tim Perry, Mary for Evangelicals (Downers Grove, Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 2006) p. 113. Gerry Soliman admittedly has not read this book].

Monday, October 18, 2010

REPLY TO JUST FOR CATHOLICS.ORG. 2: HOW CAN I KNOW? ON BIBLE ALONE

St. Luke the Evangelist writing the Gospel Account under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit and guided by the Apostles.


HOW CAN I KNOW?



* This is the second part of my rebuttal of the website JUSTFORCATHOLICS.ORG. of Joe Mizzi. Readers complained to me that it is very deceptive in style, pretending to be Catholic in order to lure our faithful to the Born-Again Cult.



[The Holy Scriptures are able to make you wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus (2 Timothy 3:15).]



Yes, they can make you wise but it is nowhere stated by this passage that SCRIPTURES ALONE are the guide for salvation and it is also nowhere stated in this passage that we shall be saved by FAITH ALONE. NO, NO, NO… Your chosen verse does not give the conclusion that you are claiming to have been contained in the text. Thus, you are free to hallucinate until you open your eyes to the truth that your Scriptures Alone and Faith Alone Dogmas are UNBIBLICAL and mere TRADITION OF MEN.



[The Lord Jesus described two ways, the broad road leading to destruction and the narrow one leading to life. How can we know the way that leads to heaven, and avoid the other?]



By rejecting MAN-MADE DOCTRINES which are not truly coming from the Holy Spirit but from heretics who concocted new doctrines contrary to what is actually taught by the Lord Jesus and His Apostles under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. And your beloved doctrines of BIBLE ALONE, FAITH ALONE, RAPTURE, ONCE SAVED ALWAYS SAVED, SALVATION AS ONE-TIME EVENT, CHRISTIANS ARE DUNGHILL COVERED WITH SNOW AND MANY OTHERS are EXAMPLES OF MAN-MADE TEACHINGS.



[The Gospel is the true way to life because it is God's message to humanity.]



CORRECT. BUT SOLA SCRIPTURA or BIBLE ALONE is contrary to the Gospel and is not contained in the Gospel. So, you claim that you are presenting the Gospel is a mere illusion not founded on reality. Where can you find in THE GOSPEL accounts that Jesus taught ‘Bible Alone’?



[People have invented several religions but all of them are false; the Bible warns us that “the world through wisdom did not know God” (1 Corinthians 1:21).]



THE MOST RECENT INVENTED RELIGIONS NOWADAYS ARE THE BORN-AGAIN SECTS. THEIR VERY REGISTRATION IN THE GOVERNMENT RECORDS FOR INCORPORATION SHOWS THAT THEY ARE NEWLY INVENTED IT IS THEREFORE VERY CLEAR THAT THIS PASSAGE AND THIS STATEMENT POINT DIRECTLY ON YOUR OWN BORN-AGAIN RELIGION.



[God's message is recorded in the Bible.]



YES. BUT THE BIBLE DOES NOT SAY THAT GOD’S ENTIRE MESSAGE IS RECORDED IN THE BIBLE ALONE. WILL YOU PLEASE GIVE ME THE PASSAGE SAYING THAT THE WHOLE OF GOD’S MESSAGE OR THE ENTIRE MESSAGE OF GOD IS RECORDED IN THE BIBLE ALONE?



[It was written by holy people who were guided by the Holy Spirit.]



HA, HA, HA… THANK YOU VERY MUCH. NOW YOU HAVE ACCEPTED OUR DOCTRINE THAT THERE ARE HOLY PEOPLE. IF THERE ARE HOLY PEOPLE THEN THESE PEOPLE WHO BECAME HOLY BY THE GRACE OF GOD ARE NOT ‘DUNGHILL COVERED WITH SNOW’ BECAUSE DUNGHILLS WHETHER COVERED WITH SNOW, KETCHUP, SOYSAUCE OR CREAM ARE STILL DIRTY. THE TRUE BELIEVERS ARE PURIFIED, CLEANSED AND SANCTIFIED BY GOD NOT JUST ‘IMPUTED’ BUT THOROUGHLY MADE HOLY.



HERE, YOU HAVE ACCEPTED OUR DOCTRINE ON SAINTS…THAT THOSE WHO HAVE BEEN REDEEMED ARE MADE HOLY. THEY ARE THE ‘SAINTS’ OF GOD.



THIS IS CONTRARY TO THE BORN-AGAIN DOCTRINE OF IMPUTED JUSTIFICATION. BECAUSE THAT BELIEF DOES NOT SPEAK OF THE CLEANSING AND TOTAL SANCTIFICATION OF THE BELIEVERS BUT ONLY DECLARATION OF RIGHTEOUSNESS WHILE REMAINING IN A STATE OF SIN – THUS, ‘DUNGHILL COVERED WITH SNOW’. NO MATTER HOW THICK THE SNOW IS THE HUMAN PERSON FOR THE BORN AGAIN IS NOT THE SNOW BUT THE DUNGHILL. YOU AND YOUR MEMBERS ARE VERY DIRTY THEN. FOR THAT REASON, THERE IS NO HOLY PERSONS AMONG THE BORN-AGAIN BECAUSE YOU ARE ALL ‘DUNGHILL COVERED WITH SNOW.’



[ We can trust the Bible because it is God's book.]



WE CAN TRUST THE BIBLE BECAUSE IT IS GOD’S BOOK. ON THE OTHER HAND, WE CANNOT TRUST THE BORN AGAIN BECAUSE THEIR DOCTRINE OF ‘BIBLE-ALONE’ IS UNBIBLICAL AND NON-BIBLICAL. IT IS AN INVENTED DOCTRINE ONLY INVENTED IN THE 16TH CENTURY BY MARTIN LUTHER, THE HERETIC.



IF YOU TRULY TRUST THE BIBLE THEN YOU ARE COMPELLED TO REJECT ‘BIBLE ALONE’ DOCTRINE BECAUSE IT IS NOT PART OF THE BIBLE WHICH IS GOD’S BOOK. SOLA SCRIPTURA IS CONTRARY TO THE SCRIPTURES OF GOD.



[We can also be confident that it is the sure guide to Heaven.]



THE BIBLE YES BUT NOT THE BORN-AGAIN THEY ARE LIARS AND INVENTORS OF DOCTRINES.

[The Holy Scriptures “are able to make you wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus” (2 Timothy 3:15).]



YES. BUT THE PASSAGE NEVER SPEAKS OF SOLA SCRIPTURA.



[What about church tradition? Jesus warned us against tradition (Mark 7:1-13).]



O LIAR, LIAR, LIAR. YOU ARE BEING DECEPTIVE HERE. THIS IS NOT APOSTOLIC TRADITION. WE DO NOT FOLLOW THE TRADITIONS OF THE JEWS CONCERNING WASHING OF HANDS, ETC. NO, NO, NO.



OUR APOSTOLIC TRADITION IS GIVEN HERE:



2 Thessalonians 2:15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold THE TRADITIONS which ye have been taught, whether by WORD, or our EPISTLE.



SEE, HE, HE, HE… HOLD FAST TO THE TRADITIONS [plural]. STAND FAST TO THEM. AND THESE TRADITIONS ARE BOTH ORAL AND WRITTEN.



DEFINITELY THESE TRADITIONS REFERRED TO BY ST. PAUL ARE NOT THE SAME WITH THE ONE REJECTED BY JESUS. HOW COME YOU ARE IGNORANT OF IT? OR YOU DELIBERATELY WITHHELD THIS PASSAGE?



[He accused the Jews that they were “making the word of God of no effect through your tradition.” They should have remained faithful to the written Word. Similarly, church tradition has changed the clear teaching of the Bible.]



THE FACT THAT THERE IS NOT APOSTOLIC TRADITION IN BORN-AGAIN SECTS AND CULTS IS A SOLID PROOF OF ITS DEMONIC NATURE AND SATANIC ORIGIN. BECAUSE THE TRUE CHRISTIAN CHURCH HAS APOSTOLIC TRADITION:



2 Thessalonians 3:6 Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after THE TRADITION WHICH HE RECEIVED OF US.



HOW COME THE BORN-AGAIN DO NOT HAVE TRADITION FROM THE APOSTLES? BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT APOSTOLIC IN ORIGIN… INSTEAD THEY ARE NEWLY INVENTED BY THE MODERN DAY HERETICS.



[For instance, the church commends the veneration of statues even though the second commandment forbids the making of graven images and bowing down before them (Exodus 20:4).]



JOE MIZZI IS LYING HERE. EXODUS 20:4 FORBIDS THE MAKING OF GRAVEN IMAGES OF FALSE GODS AND IDOLS. BUT IT IS NOWHERE STATED IN THE PASSAGE THAT IT IS EVIL TO MAKE GRAVEN IMAGES OF ANGELS AND SAINTS. IN FACT, JUST FEW CHAPTERS AFTER EXODUS 20 GOD ORDERED… COMMANDED MOSES TO MAKE GRAVEN IMAGES OF CHERUBIMS TO BE PUT ON TOP OF THE ARK OF THE COVENANT WHICH WAS PLACED IN THE HOLY OF HOLIES:



Exodus 25:18 And thou shalt MAKE two CHERUBIMS OF GOLD, of BEATEN WORK shalt thou make them, in the two ends of the mercy seat.



Exodus 25:19 And make one cherub on the one end, and the other cherub on the other end: even of the mercy seat shall ye make the cherubims on the two ends thereof.





Exodus 25:20 And the cherubims shall stretch forth their wings on high, covering the mercy seat with their wings, and their faces shall look one to another; toward the mercy seat shall the faces of the cherubims be.



Exodus 25:21 And thou shalt put the mercy seat above upon the ark; and in the ark thou shalt put the testimony that I shall give thee.



Exodus 25:22 And there I will MEET with thee, and I will COMMUNE with thee from above the mercy seat, from BETWEEN THE TWO CHERUBIMS which are upon the ark of the testimony, of all things which I will give thee in commandment unto the children of Israel.



O THAT IS VERY CLEAR. THE LORD GOD ORDERED MOSES TO MAKE STATUES OF CHERUBIMS MADE OF GOLD. AND IN VERSE 22 GOD PROMISED THAT HE WILL MEET MOSES BETWEEN THE TWO STATUES. IF STATUES AND ALL GRAVEN IMAGES ARE ABOMINABLE TO GOD THEN HOW COME HE CHOSE TO MEET AND COMMUNE WITH MOSES IN BETWEEN THESE STATUES?



THE FACT THAT GOD WANTS TO HAVE STATUES OF CHERUBIMS SHOWS THAT THE BORN-AGAIN ARE LYING TO US. NOT ALL STATUES ARE PROHIBITED BY GOD AND NOT ALL ARE VIOLATION OF HIS COMMAND NOT TO MAKE GRAVEN IMAGES WHICH IS A PROHIBITION ON FALSE GODS AND IDOLS. MUCH MORE, GOD CAN MEET AND COMMUNICATE WITH HIS PEOPLE THROUGH STATUES OF ANGELS AND OF HIS HOLY SERVANTS.

[What about religious teachers? We should listen to teachers as long as their teaching is faithful to the Bible.]



THAT IS THE REASON WHY WE HAVE TO REJECT THE BORN AGAIN PASTORS BECAUSE THEIR TEACHINGS ARE NOT FAITHFUL TO THE BIBLE. THEY INSTEAD RELY ON THE INVENTED DOGMAS OF MARTIN LUTHER AND OF JOHN CALVIN, TWO OF THE MOST POPULAR HERETICS IN THE LATER TIMES.



[We ought to imitate the people of Berea who “received the word with all readiness, and searched the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things were so” (Acts 17:11).]



THE BEREANS SEARCHED THE SCRIPTURES DAILY LIKE WHAT THE CATHOLICS ARE DOING IN EVERY DAILY WORSHIPS BUT THEY DIDN’T ADVOCATE ‘BIBLE ALONE’. WHERE DID THE BEREANS SAY THAT? NOWHERE.



THE BEREANS DIDN’T PRACTICE SOLA SCRIPTURA. ACTUALLY YOUR INTERPRETATION OF L’AFFAIR BEREANS IS DISTORTED. LET US CHECK THE PASSASGE:



Act 17:10 And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea: who coming thither went into the synagogue of the Jews.



Act 17:11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.



Act 17:12 Therefore many of them believed; also of honourable women which were Greeks, and of men, not a few.



ACTS 17:10 THE APOSTLES SENT ST. PAUL AND SILAS TO BEREA WHY? BECAUSE SCRIPTURES ALONE ARE NOT ENOUGH. THEY NEED THE PRESENCE OF THE CHURCH AUTHORITY TO EXPLAIN THE SACRED SCRIPTURES TO THEM.



IN ACTS 17:11 ST. PAUL FOUND THE BEREANS MORE OPEN TO THE GOSPEL BECAUSE THEY WERE READING THE SCRIPTURES AND IN v. 12 THE BELIEVED. DID THEY BELIEVE THROUGH ‘BIBLE ALONE’? NO. THEY BELIEVED BECAUSE OF THE PREACHING OF STS. PAUL AND SILAS AND THEIR FIDELITY TO SACRED SCRIPTURES. IT’S NOT FAITH ALONE THEN BUT APOSTOLIC PREACHING + SCRIPTURES or VICE VERSA.



[What about our personal opinion? We should eagerly seek God's way, not our own. “Trust in the Lord with all your heart, and lean not on your own understanding” (Proverbs 3:5).]



VERY GOOD. WE MUST NOT BELIEVE YOU THEN BECAUSE YOUR TEACHINGS ARE ONLY YOUR OWN PERSONAL OPINIONS. IN FACT, OTHER PASTORS ARE NOT TEACHING THE THINGS THAT YOU ARE SAYING. ACTUALLY THERE IS NO UNITY IN DOCTRINES AMONG BORN-AGAIN. SO YOU AND YOUR FELLOW PASTORS MUST NOT BE TRUSTED AT ALL BECAUSE YOU ARE NOT ‘GODS’. WE CAN ONLY TRUST GOD. I HOPE YOU HAVE AN IOTA OF TRUST ON YOUR WIFE, YOUR CHILDREN AND ON YOURSELF BECAUSE YOU ARE HUMAN.



[The Bible is the only sure guide to heaven.]



REALLY? WHERE IS THAT IN THE BIBLE? CHAPTER AND VERSE PLEASE.



THAT DOCTRINE IS DEMONIC. WHY? THERE IS ANOTHER SURE GUIDE TO HEAVEN BESIDES THE BIBLE. WHAT IS THAT? THE CHURCH – THE PILLAR AND GROUND OF TRUTH:



1 Timothy 3:15 But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is THE CHURCH of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.


AND THIS ONE, TRUE CHURCH SHALL NOT BE OVERCAME EVEN BY THE GATE OF HELL:


Matthew 16:18 "And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."


O THAT IS CLEAR AND CATEGORICAL. THE CHURCH… THE ONE AND ONLY CHURCH, NOT THE DISUNITED CHURCHES OF THE BORN AGAIN, BUT THE ONE AND ONLY CHURCH IS THE PILLAR AND GROUND OF TRUTH. SO THEN, IF YOU ARE IN THE CHURCH YOU ARE GROUNDED ON TRUTH. THAT CHURCH IS THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.



[The person who learns, believes and obeys its message can say: “Your word is a lamp to my feet and a light to my path” (Psalm 119:105).]



THANK YOU AGAIN. SEE, YOU GOT IT CORRECTLY. IT IS NOT ‘FAITH ALONE’ BUT FAITH + GOOD WORKS [Learning and Obedience]. IT STARTS FROM LEARNING THEN BELIEVING AND THEN OBEYING. HE, HE, HE…



I LIKE YOU JOE MIZZI. YOU ARE AFFIRMING MANY OF OUR CATHOLIC BELIEFS TO THE DETRIMENT OF YOUR OWN.