Last updated on 2011.10.10
A big hello to our new neighbors in Scenic, the Iglesia ni Cristo, a big cultish church from the Philippines that calls itself Christian. Barbara Soderlin reports that the church paid $700,000 this summer to buy the whole town of Scenic, about 40 miles southeast of Rapid City.
West River has plenty of wild-eyed crusaders for Christ. But the new owners of Scenic make me antsy about taking Highway 44 to the Badlands. I'd hate to get caught up in a church like this:
- In classic cult fashion, Iglesia ni Cristo demands strict obedience from its members.
- More cultishness: the church is a family business. Its only leaders have been founder (and God's "last messenger") Felix Manalo, his son, and, currently, his grandson. Hello, Moonies....
- These "Christians" deny the divinity of Jesus. I have a problem with people who can't use simple words like "Christian" correctly.
- They say the only path to salvation is through their church. Lutherans, Baptists, fundagelicals out by Wal-Mart: you're all as wrong as I am!
- They impose compulsory church attendance on members.
- They tell members not to join labor unions (well, that will get them in good with some South Dakotans).
- They tell members to avoid going to court (that will get them in good with Kristi Noem).
- They push members toward block-voting in public elections... wait a minute! I'll bet Gordon Howie is bringing them here so he can get them to vote for him in a primary challenge against Noem! Now it all comes together!
Keep your cult radars tuned to Scenic over the coming weeks. I'd like to think that maybe we'll just get some nice neighbors who boost our tourism dollars. Iglesia ni Cristo has millions of members worldwide; maybe some of them will come to South Dakota for a nice little revival meeting now and then.
But when a personality-based church buys an entire town in a relatively isolated region, I can't help hearing "Warren Jeffs" and "Jim Jones" in my head.
Update 2011.10.05 05:42 MDT: If you think I sound intolerant of other beliefs, take a look at what Iglesia ni Cristo thinks of Christians:
...we now ought to reject the catholic priests and the protestant pastors, for they are ministers of satan. We also ought to reject the Catholic Church and the different protestant churches, for they are not of God, but of satan or the devil [INC publication Pasugo, August 1961, p. 39].
That ought to go over well at the next interfaith coffee.
Hello 'No',
You may not have noticed it, but here at the Madville Times comment section we don't use that word and we don't accept it from others as well. I hope Corey keeps your comment up to show what ignorance looks like, but I hope you will learn to have an intelligent conversation and engage the rest of us beyond the brilliance of the F-Bomb.
Not holding my breath though.
Cory is a redneck? I have met Cory, Cory is a friend of mine, Cory is no redneck. You sir may be.
direct and to the point....I whole hardheartedly disagree with "no"....Now "no" tell us how you really feel.......and swearing on the sabbath......
The majority of the points you've pointed out - if you actually think about it - has no negative effect on the rest of the world. Many of the reasons as to why we have these beliefs and do what we do is WITHIN the Bible. For those who live near Scenic, or are curious about the Iglesia Ni Cristo/Church of Christ - feel free to visit your locale congregation and sit in on one of our worship services/bible studies. And feel free to ask the ministers/residential workers any and all questions. :)
Have to agree with Melanie.
All lies! Only shows total ignorance of the writer. Better visit an Iglesia Ni Cristo congregation nearest you - observe, ask, investigate without prejudice.
This Church has grown by leaps and bounds in such a short time, whereas all other churches are collapsing everywhere. It's because God is with this Church.
Welcome to the Iglesia Ni Cristo!
JTP: no substance to your outburst. I don't care much for being called "ignorant" when I provide pretty straightforward information about the church, none of which you refute, while you only spew the typical propaganda lines of a cult member.
How can a Christian church deny the divinity of Christ and the Trinity? And how do you plan to maintain tax-exempt church status while infringing on the freedom of political conscience of your members? Those are pretty simple questions that shouldn't require all of us to truck over to Scenic to get an answer.
...and Melanie, there is a very real negative impact to using language in correctly and enforcing strict obedience in political and economic matters on your members. There is also a negative impact to claiming you are Christian but denying the divinity of Christ. You deceive people into thinking you are Christian and thus make the entire religion weaker. We don't need to succumb to your recruiting pitches or waste a Sunday in your church subjected to your brainwashing to recognize bad theology.
...and speaking of lies, JTP, how can you welcome the church to South Dakota when you're writing from the Philippines?
Will this "community" incorporate as a municipality or village township? What statutes will it adopt to protect its citizens from themselves? Will its religious leader be installed as a justice of the peace? Where will it bank?
I see from the link that this is a "Church of Christ". Here is another link that gives a broader overview:
http://church-of-christ.org/
And this church is not alone. Here are other Churches of Christ in South Dakota:
http://church-of-christ.org/churches/United_States/South%20Dakota_S.htm
Careful, Steve: I think Iglesia ni Cristo is a different critter from the "Church of Christ" down the block. Same terms, but very different organizations. This Filipino outfit is a very specific cult, founded and run by the Manalos.
Cory, I agree with your warning and your analysis. The overall structure claims to be not denominational, and the churches are independent. I am not in agreement with their denial of the deity of Christ. Many of the founding fathers, the Mormons, and many other accepted groups believe the same way about the trinity. Critics point to Mathew 24 and say they are false teachers using Christ's name. Some simply call them "cults".
Thanks, Steve. I just want to be clear that my comments about Iglesia ni Cristo indiciate no beef with any local churches calling themselves "Church of Christ." This specific Filipino "church" has problems, and South Dakotans should be wary of the bad theology of these new neighbors.
Sibby's right. There are quite a few Christian eschatologies similar to this one, especially in the early church and later, after protestant split with the Roman Catholic Church and the subsequent factionalization of same.
I have frequently quoted Thomas Jefferson as saying that "ridicule is the only weapon" that can be used against "unintelligible propositions." The part I usually leave out is what TJ was talking about when he said it.
Here's the whole quote:
“Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them; and no man ever had a distinct idea of the trinity. It is the mere Abracadabra of the mountebanks calling themselves the priests of Jesus.†― Thomas Jefferson
Yup. TJ was a Trinity denier.
My read on this church is that bottom line, they are apocalypticists, of which there is no shortage in Western South Dakota, I've noticed.
They might do just fine out here. ;^)
...reading a little further, they seem to have a somewhat belligerent debating style, especially as it pertains to internal and external criticism.
Cory... why is this all of a sudden reminding me of Bob Ellis?
After doing hours of research on this church and their doctrines, I feel it is the most responsible thing to to tell you that this church is a cult.
There are several passages that warn us of those that change the word of God and what the consequences will be.
Every word of God is tested; He is a shield to those who take refuge in Him. Do not add to His words Lest He reprove you, and you be proved a liar. (Pr 30:5,6) also read: Duet. 4:2 and Rev. 22:18,19
A cult, in Christian terminology, is a group gathered around an individual or an organization that claims to be a prophet, a messenger, an apostle, or one who has been specially chosen by God. Cults claim to be in harmony with the historic Christian faith but in fact, they deny all the foundational beliefs of the Christian faith such as the Trinity, the Deity of Christ, Salvation by Grace Alone to name a few. All cults have the following common traits:
1.They all claim to be the restoration of Christianity; they are the true Church, the remnant, movement, and only organization of God. All others are in error.
2.They all have extra biblical authority. The Bible is never enough; it cannot be understood apart from the cult. The Bible always has a secondary status, and it is the cult’s book or new revelation that is above the Bible, and interprets it.
3.All cults deny the Deity of Jesus Christ. They all deny that Jesus is the eternal God made flesh.
4.All cults deny salvation by grace alone. Cults emphasize that works are absolutely necessary for salvation.
The INC claims to be the only true Church of Christ on the earth. In fact. Felix Manalo taught that the true Gospel was lost for 1900 years until he restored it in July 1914. In fact Manalo taught that 1914 marked the time of “the ends of the earthâ€, and hence the year 1914 has come to have significance for the INC in the same way as it has for the Jehovah’s Witnesses. Manalo taught that after the Apostles died in the first century, true Christianity was lost and God chose Manalo to restore it. The INC believes that Felix Manalo is the messenger of God for these last days. The INC claims to be the restored Church of Christ. Thus in the INC’s own words, “The worshipper must also belong to where God chooses His servants to be, that is, in the true Church-the Church of Christ.†(God’s Message May 2002 Vol.25 No.5 pp.5, 10. emphasis mine) “ It is our Lord Jesus Christ who founded this Church with Brother Felix Y. Manalo as the instrument in revealing the truth about the Church.†(Ibid. p.19)
They teach these Unbiblical Beliefs and vehemently oppose the Biblical revelation of the Triune God.
Believes the Son as the literal Word (which has no pre-existence) who became man. He was given power by the Father to do supernatural miracles. He is not God.
Believes in an impersonal Holy Spirit, a power sent by the Father in the name of Jesus Christ. The Holy Spirit is not God but one of the spirits sent by God.
Believes a person must hear the "gospel" from authorized INC messengers and INC ministers. They are the only ones who have God's Holy Spirit in order for them to understand the Bible.
Believes the official name of the church is "Iglesia ni Cristo" ( Church of Christ) while other churches that use this name is not the true church.
Thanks, Patricia. I have only to add that it's okay with me if they want to believe that, as long as they don't insist that you and I have to.
Patricia, has it right. God Bless. That is why I referred to Mathew 24. I wonder if TJ left that out of his version of the Bible?
Politically, we have theological problems with Romney's and Glenn Beck's Mormonism. The Mormon prophecy says Mormon elders will save the American Constitution from its 'hanging by a thread". We also have issues with the Dominion Theology (Seven Mountains) that is pushed by Perry, Gingrich, and perhaps even Palin and Bachman. And we have theology issues with the left's Social Gospel. From an eschatology standpoint, they are the same as the Dominion Theology heresy.
It is very interesting that David Barton, the America is a Christian Nation guy, is in bed with the Dominion Theology and the Mormon movement. He is trying to say Glenn Beck is a Christian. Again, we need to read what Jesus said in Mathew 24 regarding many using His name to deceive.
At least that is where I am at now. I am still studying and researching.
The Jefferson Bible is online here, Sibby:
http://www.angelfire.com/co/JeffersonBible/
"The editor suggests that The Jefferson Bible be read as Thomas Jefferson intended, without even thinking about what was left out or moved from one place to another."
That makes TJ a false teacher. Is it really open minded to not look at what he left out? I don't think so. Bill, is it wise to accept everything thing out there when most of it is false? Things have really changed since the days when the Bible was a textbook.
I believe in religious tolerence, Sibby. And yes, I think it's wise to accept everything that's going on in the universe. Why would you not? It is what it is.
In regards to Patricia's response, your #2 says that the INC has another book? What other book are you referring to? Is it fair to even call this church a Filipino church when it's congregations are located all around the world? I'm not going to call anyone ignorant for doing "hours of research", most likely justified google and Wikipedia, but I will say that everyone is entitled to rant their own opinion. But to call your opinions facts without proper exposure to the culprit, which in your terms would be "cult", then I think your hours of research to be rendered useless. Like asking the Native Americans why they loved the English, why would you source out your "facts" from a biased source, when you can directly attend a service, "cult meeting" if it suits you, and see if all that negativity in your mind holds true. I am no minister or expert on religion so I won't quote verses and devise my own interpretation because then I'd be as guilty as a cult wouldn't I?
As much as I reject the theology of this group and think the fundamental theology warrants scrutiny, I think we have to be careful about jumping to conclusions until we observe anything improper. Yes, it might lead to another Waco or child abuse like Jeffords. But, like us all, they too are innocent until proven guilty.
Let's watch them in practice. If they allow members to come and go, nobody's civil liberties are being violated. If they build a fence around their property, it raises the stakes because a fence not only keeps people out (if they are threatened, they deserve the same police protection we all get) but it does make us wonder if it has another purpose.
And just as I can't keep my daughter in our basement (as much as I'm tempted), members of this group can't retain people without their permission without a court order. It is reasonable to observe the purpose and use of a fence. Civil liberties are for all or none.
"Why would you not?"
Because, as I said, man-made and false. Which leads me to Poges comment. I read Patricia's point:
"The Bible always has a secondary status, and it is the cult’s book or new revelation that is above the Bible, and interprets it."
She explained the "new revelation" later. Mormonism does the same thing, as they too deny the deity of Jesus.
Poges, I hope you are careful not to take things out of context. If Patricia has, then bring make the position in context please.
Troy,
So are you saying that its not a cult until after they build a fence? I think the point that needs to be made is that Jesus wanted of many using His name to deceive. If we define a cult as an organization whose teaching is false (not follow Biblical doctrine), then the issue of a fence is irrelevant.
Troy,
Very well said.
Steve,
People get to be wrong as long as they don't force others to be wrong with them. When it comes to matters of faith, it'll be up to God to judge.
There are means of coercion stronger than fences, and we citizens have a right to be concerned about such practices, but IF this group isn't violating people's civil liberties or being coercive, the U.S. government has no obligation or permission to stop them from owning property or practicing their faith.
Troy and I are on the same page on this one, politically speaking.
It is, after all, the American way. We not a theocracy (thank God.)
Footnote: A quick cursory overview suggests to me that this church's dogma is not all that dissimilar to that of the Jehovah's Witnesses. It might be interesting to hear them compare notes. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jehovah's_Witnesses
"We not a theocracy (thank God.)"
We currently have a "New Age" theocracy being created with "means of coercion stronger than fences". As Jesus predicted, most will be deceived. Sad that in the name of tolerance, cults get a pass. So they are now mainstreamed in the name of secularism. Implemented from the United Nations in the name of "National Standards". And it is sucessful because we lack discernment that comes from reading the Bible.
From Patricia's comment:
"In fact Manalo taught that 1914 marked the time of “the ends of the earthâ€, and hence the year 1914 has come to have significance for the INC in the same way as it has for the Jehovah’s Witnesses."
And now Bill says:
"A quick cursory overview suggests to me that this church’s dogma is not all that dissimilar to that of the Jehovah’s Witnesses."
Bill, don't you think maybe it is in your best interest to take Patricia more seriously?
Sibby, huh? I'm taking everybody at their word. Is that not enough? I believe most are sincere and serious in their beliefs. What more were you expecting from me?
"I believe most are sincere and serious in their beliefs."
Bill, I agree with that. The point is that those who are deceived are also sincere and serious. Is it good to allow deception to go unchallenged? If not then, if the Bible is not the standard for discernment, then what is the standard?
"Poges", you're clearly coming to this theological discussion unprepared. My readers are smarter than a few snarky comments. They read and research. They discuss religion intelligently. You throw some stale rhetorical tactics, but at no point do you explain how denying the divinity of Christ allows INC to claim to be Christian. I have additonal issues with the apparent cult of personality and authoritarianism of the church, but the incorrect use of the term "Christian" by INC members is the first problem I want to hear resolved. Poges, your little quips may work to soothe inattentive INC congregants, but they won't win points here. Explain how a Christian church can coherently claim that Christ is not divine.
Sibby, I always think a good place to start is the ethic of reciprocity. It's in practically everybody's "Bible."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Golden_Rule
I'm a member of this church...being branded as a cult is not new to us because we don't believe in the Trinity, a word we can't find in the bible...we are more biblical than you think...
We are not controlled nor brain-washed...we actually live like you...have a job like you...go to market like you...finished and got a degree like you...the only difference is our belief and how we respect the words of God.
Are you moving to Scenic, Menorrah?
No...I have a nice job here in California...own a home here and have children... We have about 60 congregations in California. The church buys property to house retired pastors and those widows of pastors...seems to me that south Dakota is a nice retirement area.
Read I Tim. 5 about widows....
Why are we Christians? Because we believe in our Lord Jesus Christ, our savior- Acts 2:22. we recognize the Father is the only true God- John 17:1-3, 1 Cor. 8:6
O.K., enough dodging, pseudonymous INC apologists. Simple question: Is Jesus divine? Was he God incarnate?
Iglesia Ni Cristo is a political group originated from the Philippines which denies the deity of Jesus Christ. INC believes that only Iglesia Ni Cristo members will be saved while Catholics, Protestants, Muslims, Buddhists will all burn in Hell. INC founder Felix Manalo is believed to be an angel.
Iglesia Ni Cristo is a politically influential group in the Philippines. INC members are being intructed during elections to vote the politicians that the INC leadership are endorsing. Iglesia Ni Cristo members died in the violent EDSA3 protest. Gloria Arroyo declared State of Rebellion during EDSA3 • INC tried and failed to stop the Impeachment case of the Ombudsman in Congress. INC is known to be a supporter, friend and ally of Gloria Arroyo which survey says as the Most Corrupt President.
Eduardo Manalo, the INC CULT leader can barely speaks straight English.
Jesus is not the true God...but he is divine (holy). The Father is the only true God - John 17:1-3, 1 Cor. 8:6
Robin: English-speaking skills matter much less than rejecting fundamental Christian doctrine and imposing authoritarian and non-Scirptural impositions on cult members.
"Menorrah" -- just what is that answer supposed to mean? Was Felix Manalo "divine"? Are INC members? How are you using that word? Are you saying Jesus was just a really good man?
He preached in English when he visited in the 90's...I was there!
No... Manalo is just a sinner like us...Jesus Christ is our Lord and Savior.
May I ask a question to the author? If a church doesn't believe in the Trinity, is it a cult?
So, if I may ask members of Iglesia ni Cristo are some of you beliefs based on early Arianism and the teachings of Arius?
But is Jesus the son of God? Disavowing core tenets of Christianity doesn't make you a cult any more than it makes me a cult. It does, however, make you something other than Christian.
Yes, he is the son of God... That makes his Father the one God.
No, Arianism is not our root...maybe similar but not.
I am starting to think that we need to amend our freedom of religion so that religions which are more like businesses don't get tax breaks and exceptions for their lunacy. A democracy won't work with religions which are fundamentally anti-democratic and intent on imposing their folly on all.
@douglas, I agree...
Like the church of body modification...they have tattoo salons
Click this link to know more about this largest independent Christian religion that started in Asia- the Iglesia ni Cristo (Church of Christ) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_vALk-DVydA
Aside, Christians are those who believe and follow the teachings Jesus Christ, it doesn't necessary mean that a person is a Christian if he/she believes the Jesus is a god. Before we came into judgement, we should be fair in examining a religion. For the author of this article, you should define clearly what is a cult and have sufficient proofs to defend your definition and arguments .
Always thought the reason for learning about differing religious beliefs was to further my understanding of people and why they thought the way they did, not to brand all religous or non religous view points contrary to mine as wrong.
Mr Sibson, I will answer your question "If the Bible is not the standard for discernment, then what is the standard?"
In the United States it is the Constitution and lawfully enacted laws. So long as a religion does not cause physical harm to the individual then the practice of that religion is acceptable and should not be subject to persecution or prosecution.
I can't leave Bill Fleming out of this either. Told you before you have my utmost respect and your comment "I believe most are sincere and serious in their beliefs" shows me that you are a true liberal and worthy of respect. I say the same thing just a little different. I believe it is not necessary for us to believe the same things, only that you believe, that I believe what I believe.
Now for all you who belive that your way is the only way to Heaven or that a God does not exist. We will all learn on the day we die who is right and who is wrong and not until. Although I do believe in Christ Jesus I am not arrogant enough to believe that merely by believing in Him I am entitled to a place in His Heavenly Home. I believe that Heaven is a very small place. (yeah Bill, like it or not think He has a special place in His heart for the true liberals of the world, cause there ain't a lot of them).
Joseph G Thompson
The author of this article, Cory Allen Heidelberger, agrees with the links in the original post that, among other problems, a cult asserts authority over its members, is often far too personality oriented (e.g., run like a hereditary monarchy, with leadership passed on from father to son to grandson). Block voting, telling members not to go to court or join unions... alarming.
Now don't be a wiseguy with me, "statsstudent" (and good grief: can you INC defenders just drop the pretense and speak with real names?). Christianity is more than just following the teachings of Jesus. I follow several teachings of Jesus, but I am an atheist. To call me a Christian is highly problematic. From what I'm reading, INC members are not Christians. They are, however, apparently highly brittle and defensive. Funny: my seminarian wife never gets that way when we talk about religion and about what might be wrong with her church.
So M above is telling us Jesus is the son of God. M, is anyone else the son of God? What does it mean to you to be "the son of God"?
And just what does INC plan to do in Scenic, anyway? Massive church camp?
Thinking you are saved by works is also a theologically problematic belief. Again, that doesn't make you a cult... but it does make you wrong.
Since you are the author of the article, can you define the word cult in the context you use in this article? I use nicname in the internet for because that's what internet security expert says...if we meet in person, I tell my true name.
We go to court but not if the dispute is between members..if you don't know, that is in the bible.
Enough with the pseudonyms and sock puppets, and enough with the propaganda. Answer the questions. This isn't about "the author"; this is about a cult that denies basic tenets of Christiantiy and intimidates its members into political submission to a secretive elite.
Fake names get deleted. And who needs Internet security when God is on your side? If you're moving to South Dakota, I'm sure we'll meet. Meanwhile, perhaps I'll just drive down I-90 and see if any real INC'ers will talk to me at the Rapid City branch:
Rapid City Group Worship Service
c/o Marimla's Residence
1606 Plateau Lane
Rapid City, SD 57703
Mobile: 01-605.786.4656;01-605.645.1920
Email: marimlajr@yahoo.com
O.K., enough dodging, pseudonymous INC apologists. Simple question: Is Jesus divine? Was he God incarnate?
@caheidelberger
i want to answer your question. Jesus is divine, he is the only man that not commit sin. God cannot be die or incarnate because God is a Spirit and a spirit has no flesh and bones. Christ has flesh and bones and he died so it's the proof that he is not God.
[CAH: Well, that's enough proof for me that INC is not a Christian church. C.S. Lewis would agree.]
http://www.facebook.com/PasugoGodsMessage
In its broadest sense, the word "cult" is the root of the word "culture" and refers to a set of beliefs, doctrines, images, rituals and practices unique to a specific group of adherents.
Note the word "unique." A cult is defined by exclusivity, not by inclusiveness. It is those aspects of a culture that are unique to the particular group and are not shared by other groups that define the "cult."
In most (but not all) cases, this uniqueness centers around a specific individual, and devotion to that person. This is called a "cult of personality." And again, there is an exclusiveness in this adoration of the person who is adored and exalted and (most importantly) followed and usually obeyed, oftentimes without question.
Cults of personality typically arise around charismatic leaders. Sometimes the leaders are the person being "worshipped and obeyed" and sometimes the leaders are simply the ones who have singled out and are promoting exclusive devotion to the personality to be so honored/worshiped/followed.
Cults can arise around almost anything or anybody... sports figures, musicians, politicians, objects, whatever. What matters is that they become cultural "memes" with a transcendent quality. You can have a "cult of the sacred spoon" for example, if you can convince enough people to believe that this one and only spoon is unique, has powers other spoons don't, and is worthy of your total focus and unquestioning devotion.
Rod, it's not an issue for me. I hope you enjoy South Dakota. The town you bought is in an interesting part of the State. I'm sure you will learn more when you settle in. And don't get too carried away with comments about silliness. That's a two edged sword which you would be wise to keep in your scabbard as you go about making new friends and neighbors.
Superman3028 (what a goofy moniker), I don't speak for anyone other than myself, but I know exactly what I am saying and doing. Strange that you would think otherwise.
Em seu sentido mais amplo, a palavra "cult" é a raiz da palavra "cultura" e refere-se a um conjunto de crenças, doutrinas, imagens, rituais e práticas única para um grupo especÃfico de seguidores.
Observe a palavra "única". Um culto é definido pela exclusividade, não por inclusão. São esses aspectos de uma cultura que são únicas para o grupo especial e não são compartilhadas por outros grupos que definem o "cult".
Na maioria (mas não todos) casos, esta singularidade gira em torno de um indivÃduo especÃfico, e devoção a essa pessoa. Isso é chamado de "culto da personalidade." E, novamente, há uma exclusividade nesta adoração da pessoa que é adorado e seguido exaltado e (mais importante) e, geralmente, obedecido, muitas vezes sem questionar.
Cultos de personalidade tipicamente surgem em torno de lÃderes carismáticos. Às vezes os lÃderes são a pessoa a ser "adorado e obedecido" e à s vezes os lÃderes são simplesmente os que têm escolhido e estão promovendo a devoção exclusiva à personalidade a ser homenageada / adorado / seguido.
Cultos podem surgir em torno de quase nada nem ninguém ... figuras do esporte, músicos, polÃticos, objetos, qualquer coisa. O que importa é que eles se tornem cultural "memes" com uma qualidade transcendente. Você pode ter um "culto da colher sagrado", por exemplo, se você pode convencer as pessoas o suficiente para acreditar que esta colher uma e só é único, tem poderes colheres outros não, e é digno de seu foco total e inquestionável devoção.
Superman3028 (lo que es un apodo ridÃculo), no hablo de nadie más que yo, pero yo sé exactamente lo que estoy diciendo y haciendo. Es extraño que se podrÃa pensar lo contrario.
So, Christianity is a cult of personality because they follow Christ? If that's the definityes...we follow Christ!
Heb. 13:17 is a good verse.
Do you? Or do you follow the Manalo family culture? In other words, as I said, it is the "uniqueness" of the culture that makes a cult. Lots of people follow Christ. That's what Christians are. And within the Christian culture, there are numerous "cults" who claim to have exclusive knowledge of the one true way to be a Christian.
Keep in mind that I'm not making any judgement about anyone. Just trying to be clear about what a cult is, and what it is not. Christianity is not really a cult any more, although it could be argued that it was at one time a cult within the larger context of Judiasm, growing out of a Jewish faction known as the Essenes. i.e. Christianity was originally a small Jewish cult among the Essenes, a faction of the Jewish religion.
Early in history, these Jews had a big argument among themselves as to whether or not to teach Christianity to non-jewish people as well as to jews. It is thought that Jesus' brother James wanted to keep it strictly among jews, but that Peter (and later, St. Paul) wanted to share the "good news" with the gentiles. Suffice to say that Peter's idea won out and the Christian movement took off.
The cult of the Essenes became the ubiquitous Catholic Church over the course of the next century. It became the religion almost everyone in Western Civilization embraced, and as such was no longer exclusive. Ergo, no longer a "cult".
¿Verdad? ¿O seguir la cultura de la familia Manalo? En otras palabras, como ya he dicho, es la "singularidad" de la cultura que hace un culto. Hay mucha gente que sigue a Cristo. Eso es lo que los cristianos son. Y dentro de la cultura cristiana, hay muchas "cultos" que dicen tener conocimiento exclusivo del único y verdadero camino para ser cristiano.
Tenga en cuenta que yo no estoy haciendo ningún juicio acerca de alguien. Tratando de ser claro sobre lo que es un culto, y lo que no es. El cristianismo no es una secta más, aunque se podrÃa argumentar que era a la vez un culto en el contexto más amplio del JudaÃsmo, que surgen de una facción judÃa conocida como los esenios. es decir, el cristianismo fue originalmente un pequeño culto judÃo entre los esenios, una facción de la religión judÃa.
A comienzos de la historia, estos Judios habÃa una gran discusión entre sà en cuanto a si debe o no enseñar el cristianismo a los no judÃos, asà como a judios. Se cree que el hermano de Jesús, Santiago querÃa mantener estrictamente los judios, pero que Pedro (y más tarde, St. Paul) querÃa compartir las "buenas noticias" con los gentiles. Baste decir que la idea de Pedro se impuso y el movimiento cristiano se fue.
El culto de los esenios se convirtió en la Iglesia Católica en todas partes a lo largo del próximo siglo. Se convirtió en la religión, casi todos en la civilización occidental se abrazaron, y como tal ya no era exclusiva. Ergo, ya no es una "secta".
Is my double posting in Spanish helpful? If not, I will stop doing it.
I can discuss the Trinity with you if you would like, although I have no interest in trying to change your mind about what you believe.
The thing is, Manalo does teach us to follow Christ and God. In Acts 15, who made the final decision? It was James..read it.
First off, what verse in the holy scriptures can you read the word trinity?
Your double posting doesn't help me..I speak english.
Maybe Mr. Bill is too scared to be walloped by the Church of Christ teachings. I hope you are brave enough to defend your own sect of religion, the "Roman Apostolic Catholic Church" which you can't even see that words in the whole Bible itself.
Not afraid at all. I'm just giving you the history. And am glad I don't have to repost in Spanish. I did it because some of you don't seem particularly fluent in English.
My idea of the trinity is probably a departure from the usual Roman Catholic Church dogma, although I think there are perhaps some Catholics who wouldn't have much problem with it. I doubt if you would either once I lay it out for you.
But I should be clear first that mine is a personal opinion, more of an observation, not a belief or anything you have to argue with one way or the other.
He might give the faulty johannine comma but yeah, let's give him a chance to read his bible.
Give your best shot Mr. Bill. We are waiting for you in the public debate. Bring all your Bible scholar friends if you want to.
If you understand that the New Testament was written in Greek first, you will find reference to the Trinity in the Gospel of John. The word "logos" in Greek has been translated as "word" but that is not exactly what the word "logos" means.
Are you with me so far?
@bill, that's a problem when one starts making his own God by putting too much philosophy into it. Why can't we just listen to Christ when he said that the Father is the only true God? John 17:1-3
Because I think it is important to think and work things out for oneself. That's why we have been given a mind. We should use it.
In any case, it's best to try to understand the meaning of an autor if you're going to be a good reader. And since the author of the John gospel was writing in greek we have to go to the greek to see what the word "logos" meant to people at the time it was written.
Why would one not want to do that at least?
Logos doesn't mean Trinity. It means reason or thought. You can't find any greek word for trinity either (in the holy scriptures).
You see, we are familiar with some greek words too.
John 1:1c in moffatt translation "and the word (logos) was divine"...why" luke 1:17 says because the word of God is powerful.
Good. Now were getting somewhere. If you would, please, review this and let's see if we can agree on which usage of the word logos we are all most comfortable with. I think it's important to agree on our definition of terms, don't you?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logos
We studied all the verses you may use such as Titus 2:13, Romans 9:5, john 10:30, ect and their hebrew, greek, aramaic version..whichever is applicable.
Really? That's all you've got? That the word Logos means "divine" and you are describing God who is powerful?
That really doesn't get us anywhere, does it?
I thought you said Logos meant "reason" before. And I was under the impression that you were prepared to use your God-given ability to use reason here with me this morning. Was I mistaken?
Well, as long as you don't misinterpret the word Logos, i'd be ok...so what's your point? How does that prove the trinity? I mean, John wasn't able to explain it and you were better explainer than john? Is that what it is?
Yes, it means reason..didn't I say that? And that reason was divine..meaning, that reason was powerful.
"Logos" is the root of the word "logic". And if you are not prepared to use logic in this conversation, I'm afraid we can't have it. It would be pointless.
No argument that reason is powerful. So let's set that as a criteria for our discussion, henceforth. We will let logic prevail. Fair enough?
Where's the trinity in John 1:1? You still haven't shown it...
Bill, it's pretty clear to me that the INC apologists here are weak sophists. "Dave Thompson" is a fake name used by "Menorrah." Here is a transcript of another "debate" "Menorrah" tried to sustain, but in which "Dave/Menorrah" really just wastes everyone's time with weak attempts at sounding scholarly and regular attempts to turn the discussion away from the real issues.
INC is a domineering, personality-based political group with bad theology. INC is not a Christian church. The apologists spamming this thread do not use logic. They use diversion, distraction, and insults to insualte themselves from the truth and to serve their authoritarian masters. I do not look forward to this church imposing its will on recruits in Scenic. I am also closing comments on this post due to the fruitlessness of seeking straight answers and honest identification from the INC propagandists.
Update 2011.10.05 05:46 MDT: After cooling off, I am reopening comments. But I intend to strictly enforce the comment policy, requiring real names from commenters. No more fake names, "Menorrah"/"Dave".
for the author, i am from the philippines, and a member of this "cult". (that you want to use to us, its ok for me if that will makes you comfortable )..i am sorry for i am not good in English, i am only HS grad. with no good rated average in school because of my many mistakes while studying..after all what you said about us, give your self a chance to examine all the teachings of this church..otherwise, if you can't, its alright for me, but i assure you, we are "harmless" to the teaching of LORD GOD and LORD JESUS CHRIST..thanks for welcoming us!! we really appreciate it!!!..GODBLESS ALWAYS!!
When worlds collide: http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/The_Way_to_Eden_(episode)
albert & Fren, I enjoy reading your personal experiences with the Church of Christ. Can you help us understand the specific issue brought forward in regard to the denial of the Deity of Jesus Christ and thereby the denial of the Trinity?
I just want to say, examine very carefully about this church because we can't just judge it right away because there many points and facts that this Christian organization have.
I want to just point out that the word "trinity" is not found in the bible. There is a verse that says there is one God ( I'm sorry, I forgot which verse). The trinity does not follow this because God is composed into 3 beings. "God the father", God the son", "God the holy spirit.
Most people believe that Christ is God. That contradicts his being
because he can't be both at the same time. God created everything and made Jesus but did Jesus created everything ? No. God is the only being that created the heavens and the earth ! There is so much more to that so talk to the church's ministers if you'd like to.
These are basic beliefs or truth that it's people follow and there is so much more to this and other things I want to give out but I don't want to be in a conflict with anyone and my hands are feeling numb, haha.
It hurts me when I see that report especially the last part about how this church thinks of other Christians. They do reject other preachers. DUH ! We don't follow that because we chose to follow this church and the ministers who teaches straight from the bible. Of course they reject them because we don't belong to that religion ! And it makes sense if any religion like The Church of Christ claims that other religions belong to satan because it does not follow their belief.
There are deeper things to this and please analyze a lot carefully about this cult because there is so much research to do and questions that must be answered by ministers !
Warren,
Could you then counter this argument in favor of the Deity of Jesus:
There is no prophet other than Jesus that could or dare say he who believes in me or abides in me has eternal life, (Jn.6:35,47;11:25; Jn.15) Or asked to the people to follow me (Mt.19:21;10:21; Lk. 18:22). Nor could any other prophet state that there are massive consequences for not believing who he said he is. There is probably no more of an important statement than when Jesus said to the people “for if you do not believe that I am, you will die in your sins†(John 8:24).
It is recorded of Jesus saying “I am†23 times in the gospels, 7 of these are specifically stated to identify his being in John's gospel, as John consistently uses the number 7 throughout his writings.
John's entire Gospel concentrates on his deity, and we begin to understand fully what Jesus meant when He applied the name God gave to Moses at the burning bush. Jesus makes seven important “I am†statements about himself that are spread out over his 3 years of earthly ministry.
http://www.letusreason.org/Trin23.htm
I'm sorry, I just had to repost this because of some grammar errors.
I just want to say, examine very carefully about this church because we can't just judge it right away because there are many points and facts that this Christian organization have.
I just want to point out that the word "trinity" is not found in the bible. There is a verse that says there is one God ( I'm sorry, I forgot which verse). The trinity does not follow this because God is composed into 3 beings. "God the father", God the son", "God the holy spirit.
Most people believe that Christ is God. That contradicts his being
because he can't be both at the same time. God created everything and made Jesus but did Jesus created everything ? No. God is the only being that created the heavens and the earth ! There is so much more to this so talk to the church's ministers if you'd like to.
These are basic beliefs or truth that the church's people follow and there is more detail to this and other things I want to give out but I don't want to be in a conflict with anyone and my hands are feeling numb, haha.
It hurts me when I see that report especially the last part about how this church thinks of other Christians. They do reject other preachers. DUH ! We don't follow that because we chose to follow this church and the ministers who teaches straight from the bible. Of course they reject them because we don't belong to that religion ! And it makes sense if any religion like The Church of Christ claims that other religions belong to Satan because it does not follow their belief.
There are deeper things to this and please analyze a lot carefully about this cult because there is so much research to do and questions that must be answered by ministers ! I belong to this church and have seen it's knowledge, truth and reality.
I agree, Sibby. The Gospel of John is where it all gets spelled out.
Even so, I'm guessing that you and I will perhaps each interpret what John 1-18 means somewhat differently.
I think it is the presentation of the "Logos" which, to me is synonymous with the Trinity. Others may think something different.
The point I would stress is that we are all (in essence) each CREATING our own understanding.
There is, after all, nowhere else it can come from but from within our own body/soul/mind/spirit. It's all we have to work with. It is where we find ourselves in the cosmos.
Believe it or not, it is what it is.
Further, I think the Gospel of John specifically makes this point.
Okay, a little more. We, like John the Baptist, are here to "bear witness to the light." Now, if a tree falls in the woods and there is no one to hear it, did it make a sound?
My position is, if there are no ears, there is no sound. No eyes, no light. This is pretty much what the quantum physicists are telling us as well. They describe it as "quantum entanglement."
It is what it is.
Bill,
We have to agree that from a Biblical standpoint, there is just one God. The Trinity cannot violate that. There are three personalities within that one God. Just like in one family, there is the father, the mother, and a son. There is still just one family, not three families.
No problem with that, Sibby. Interesting that you hint at the Holy Spirit as being "the mother." That is exactly how a lot of people see it. Another way some describe it is body/soul/spirit. The model you create to describe it doesn't really matter, as long as you include yourself in it.
Superman3028, we are indeed examining INC right here, right now.
You yourself are the missionary.
Thank you for being here, but if you really want to be transparent, why not tell us who you are?
I'm not really buying the "Superman" thing.
I already have a different cultural meme going on around that. A couple of them, actually. One from DC Comics, and one from Friedrich Nietzsche. They are both pretty good ones. Not sure I really want to make room for one more.
"I’m an INC member, i can recommend to all non-INC member to talk to our ministers and ask questions so that to enlighten our mind."
So you have to be a minister in order to explain the Gospel? That is like the elitist left saying we have to use experts to tell us what to do. Go ahead and take on the Book of John and the Deity of Jesus Christ.
I now invite anyone to take on this argument from Walter Martin:
Throughout the entire content of inspired Scripture the fact of Christ’s identity is clearly taught. He is revealed as Jehovah God in human form (Isaiah 9:6; Micah 5:2; Isaiah 7:14; John 1:14; 8:58; 17:5 [cf. Exodus 3:14]; Hebrews 1:3; Philippians 2:11; Colossians 2:9; and Revelation 1:8, 17–18; etc.). The deity of Jesus Christ is one of the cornerstones of Christianity, and as such has been attacked more vigorously throughout the ages than any other single doctrine of the Christian faith. Adhering to the old Arian heresy of the fourth century A.D., which Athanasius the great church Father refuted in his famous essay “On the Incarnation of the Word,†many individuals and all cults steadfastly deny the equality of Jesus Christ with God the Father, and, consequently, the Triune deity. Jehovah’s Witnesses, as has been observed, are no exception to this infamous rule. However, the testimony of the Scriptures stands sure, and the above mentioned references alone put to silence forever this blasphemous heresy, which in the power of Satan himself deceives many with its “deceitful handling of the Word of God.â€
The deity of Christ, then, is a prime answer to Jehovah’s Witnesses, for if the Trinity is a reality, which it is, if Jesus and Jehovah are “One†and the same, then the whole framework of the cult collapses into a heap of shattered, disconnected doctrines incapable of even a semblance of congruity. We will now consider the verses in question, and their bearing on the matter.
1.(a)Isaiah 7:14. “Therefore the Lord [Jehovah] himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel†(literally, “God†or “Jehovah with us,†since Jehovah is the only God).
(b)Isaiah 9:6. “For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.â€
(c)Micah 5:2. “But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.â€
Within the realm of Old Testament Scripture, Jehovah, the Lord of Hosts, has revealed His plan to appear in human form and has fulfilled the several prophecies concerning this miracle in the person of Jesus Christ. Examination of the above listed texts will more than convince the unbiased student of Scripture that Jehovah has kept His promises and did become man, literally “God with us†(Matthew 1:23; Luke 1:32–33; John 1:14).
The key to Isaiah 7:14 is the divine name “Immanuel,†which can only be rightly rendered “God with usâ€; and since there is no other God but Jehovah by His own declaration (Isaiah 43:10–11), therefore Jesus Christ and Jehovah God are of the same Substance in power and eternity, hence equal. This prophecy was fulfilled in Matthew 1:22–23; thus there can be no doubt that Jesus Christ is the son of the virgin so distinctly portrayed in Isaiah 7:14.
http://www.waltermartin.com/jehwit.html#diety
So question back to what is and what is not considered a Cult. Would you consider the Hutterites that live on the Hutterarian colonies a Cult?
"Ministers in the INC are the rightful persons who can explain the bible deeply. They are the co-workers of the messenger. Without the messenger we cannot understand the bible, we can read the bible but understanding it deeply is impossible."
Superman, then there is no reason whatsoever to be discussing any of this with you, is that correct?
“Ministers in the INC are the rightful persons who can explain the bible deeply. They are the co-workers of the messenger. Without the messenger we cannot understand the bible, we can read the bible but understanding it deeply is impossible.â€
That is what the Catholicism says about Popes and Bishops. Sorry, but that position is not in the Bible. If fact Jesus spoke out against the elitist know it alls of His time. Of course, if you are not allowed to read the Bible, then how would you know?
A young one,
Do you believe that you are not capable of understanding the Bible?
Sibby, as a Catholic, I gotta tell ya, nobody's ever told me any such thing, just so you know. And I went to a Catholic parochial school (5th & 6th grades), served mass as an altar boy, and graduated from a Catholic college (Mt. Marty, in Yankton).
You INC people are pretty interesting.
First you tell us you can't discuss any of this with us, only your ministers can. And then you want to argue about what we think the scriptures say.
So which is it?
Are any of you ministers?
If not, aren't you breaking your own rules by discussing this here?
Maybe you should just be quiet.
I sure wouldn't want you to be doing anything sinful on my account.
It shouldn't matter at all to you what any of us think of you and your faith, it seems to me, since you have already abdicated your personal responsibility for knowing anything about this other than what you are told by your "higher ups."
That said, I don't have anything more to discuss with you.
Namaste.
"Sibby, as a Catholic, I gotta tell ya, nobody’s ever told me any such thing, just so you know."
Bill,
I was raised a Catholic too. Don't remember reading teh Bible. I was told in a Dakota Wesleyan religious history of America class last spring that it is the Pope and Bishops who are given a higher authority than was is given to Scripture. ALso, look into the history of those who tried to translate the latin Bible into the language of the common folks in England and Germany during the sixteenth century. Tyndale ended up burned on a stake.
"And in their case the prophecy of Isaiah is being fulfilled"
superman,
And as I said earlier, Isaiah shows the Deity of Jesus. Please bring one of the messengers to counter what I posted from Walter Martin.
I would suggest to all the members of the Church of Christ to check some other sources before you believe someone who claims to be sent by God.
Bill, here is more on my point:
The pope, as the vicar (deputy, substitute for, representative) of Christ, is considered infallible only when he speaks “ex cathedra†(“from the chairâ€). But, as the reference below makes very clear, this tradition, along with other traditions of the church, is considered to be as authoritative as the Scriptures.
As a result the Church, to whom the transmission and interpretation of Revelation is entrusted, does not derive her certainty about all revealed truths from the holy Scriptures alone. Both Scripture and Tradition must be accepted and honoured with equal sentiments of devotion and reverence.
—Catechism 82 (emphasis added)
Thus, for the Roman Catholic, submission to the formal teaching of the church's tradition is as important as submission to the Scriptures.
The Protestant Reformation restored to the body of Christ the doctrine of sola scriptura (“Scripture aloneâ€). The Roman Catholic faith has shown a willingness to raise the pope above Jesus Christ and the Bible by giving him the right to nullify Scripture through papal decrees.
http://www.christiananswers.net/q-sum/sum-r005g.html
Sibby, did anybody in the Catholic church ever tell you you couldn't read the bible, or if you did, wouldn't be able to understand what it said?
"Sibby, did anybody in the Catholic church ever tell you you couldn’t read the bible, or if you did, wouldn’t be able to understand what it said?"
Bill, No. But I was told to go to confession, and it is Jesus Christ and not some man behind a curtain who forgives sins.
Sibby, Gutenburg printed the first Bible for mass consumption in 1450 AD, years before the Protestant refromation. At that time, virtually everyone in western civilization was Catholic. When I was in Paris, I saw an original Gutenberg bible in the Notre Dame Cathedral. So I'm thinking your info on Catholics not reading the bible is kind of bogus.
Bill,
This piece on John Wycliffe goes back to the 1300's:
http://www.ntgreek.org/SeminaryPapers/ChurchHistory/Wycliffe-Translating%20Bible%20into%20Vernacular.pdf
In fact, the Scriptures were only to be used as they were interpreted by the Church. Since the Church believed that the Pope carried on the appointment given by Christ to the Apostle Peter, the Pope was seen as the supreme ruler of the Church and could set doctrine as he pleased.
...
Wycliffe realized that since there were so many existing corruptions within the Church (in both doctrine and practice), obviously it was tradition and papal direction that was to be blamed for going astray. These corruptions had come in after the time of the Apostles and after the writings of the early Church Fathers. Therefore, Wycliffe had no choice but to appealto Scripture as the authority, overruling what had been decreed by the Pope or what had slipped into practice by church tradition. Wycliffe thus declared that the Scriptures held the highest authority for Church doctrine and practice.
And Bill, don't forget about Catechism 82.
Sibby, there is ample evidence that Catholics are free to read the bible and make up their own mind about what it says. The things you are referencing go back to the Middle Ages. Don't be silly.
Log onto http://www.iglesianicristo.ws You will find a wide-array of topics; each dedicated to an episode of the TV Program. "The Iglesia ni Cristo and the Bible" The hosts are ministers of the faith and notice that they do NOT spoon-feed you their personal opinion(s) but give you clear answers with the use of the Bible. For those of you unfamiliar with the doctrines of the Iglesia ni Cristo this would be a good place to start. You don't see topics like these addressed with many faiths today.
Before the printing press and even for a long time afterward, the only people who had access to books were Clergy and Royalty, and even at that many of them were unable to read. So it stands to reason that a great many people didn't read the bible or any other book for two very good reasons: 1. There were no books, and 2. they didn't know how to read.
I don't mind debating you Sibby, but when you say something really stupid, I'm going to tell you for your own good.
What's the difference? Is the usual remark we hear from some people when the Iglesia Ni Cristo from the Philippines is introduced to them. It is a perfectly sound and legitimate question to ask considering that there are so many religions today vying against each other, and making claims and counterclaims that theirs is the best church to affiliate ones self with.
.
While there are so many false religions in the world today, this fact alone does not warrant the conclusion that all religions are false. There is a true religion, one which worships and serves the true God based on His true words written in the Bible. Everyone owes it to God and to himself to find this true religion. And one may start searching by asking how one religion differs from the other.
.
So what indeed distinguishes the Iglesia ni Cristo from other religious groups? There are many ways of answering this question. In this article, we intend to show that what gives distinction to the Iglesia ni Cristo is her belief.
.
We maintain that the set of beliefs upheld by a religious organization is of vital importance in determining its genuineness and truthfulness. Certainly, any religion that preaches the doctrines of the devil could not be of God. To be of God the least one can do is uphold the doctrines of God written in the Holy Scriptures.
.
And here lies the uniqueness of the Iglesia ni Cristo that re-emerged in the Philipppine Islands in 1914.
.
ONE GOD, THE FATHER
.
We believe that the one and only true God is the Father, the Creator. We hold this belief because it is the doctrine taught by our Lord Jesus Christ and His Apostles (John 17:3, 1: I Corinthians 8:6). God is a Spirit (John 4:24), and, therefore, He has no flesh and bones (Luke 24:39).
.
There is no trinity of persons in God. Though the Bible speaks of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, never does it refer to all of them as gods nor as three persons in one God; rather, it points to the Father alone as the true God. The Son Himself emphasized that only the Father is the true God (John 17:3, 1) and that He himself is a man telling the truth which He received from God (John 8:40). The prophets also teach that we have only one Father who created us (Malachi 2:10); Isaiah 64:4, 8). He alone is God, there is no other God and no one is like Him (Isaiah 46:9)
.
God is from everlasting to everlasting, with no beginning or end (Psalms 90:2), immortal (I Timothy 1:17), and does not tired or become weary (Isaiah 40:28).
.
He alone is the creator of heaven, the heaven of heavens, with all their host, the earth and all things therein, and the seas and all that is in them (Nehemiah 9:6)
.
THE LORD JESUS CHRIST
.
The Iglesia ni Cristo believes that the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God (Matthew 3:17), is the one and only Savior given by God (Acts 13:23). Christ is the sole mediator between God and men (I Timothy 2:5) and the only way to God (John 14:6).
.
But we do not subscribe to the belief that Christ is God-Man. He is man in nature according to His own testimony (John 8:40) and the teachings of His Apostles (I Timothy 2:5; Matthew 1:18).
.
The attributes of a human being were found in Christ. He hungered (Matthew 4:2), thirsted (John 19:28), became weary or tired (John 4:6), slept (Matthew 8:24), and died (Matthew 27:50; I Corinthians 15:3). However, Christ as distinct from all men, is the only one who did not sin (I Peter 2:21-22; Hebrews 4:15).
.
He has been exalted by God and given a name above all other names, that at the name of Christ every knee should bow, those in heaven, and those on earth (Philippians 2:9-11). He has been placed by God far above all principality, power, might and dominion, and every name that is named, and all things have been put under His feet (Ephesians 1:21-22). Christ will eventually subject all His power and authority to the true God (I Corinthians 15:27-28). He had in so many instances introduced Himself as the Son of God but never did He appropriate the title God nor God the Son for Himself because He is not God but man.
.
The Iglesia ni Cristo is not a denomination or sect. It is niether affiliated to any federation of religious bodies nor itself an assembly of smaller religious organizations. The Iglesia ni Cristo is Christ's one true Church today.
.
The Church of Christ (Iglesia ni Cristo) is one in faith and practice. Its unity remains intact through a centralized form of administration that ensures the adherence of all members and congregations to the same Bible teachings and Church rules.
Dear friends, this should be an insightful read for those of you curious about what my faith (Church of Christ-Iglesia ni Cristo) believe about John 1:1
.
QUESTION: IS JESUS GOD IN JOHN 1:1?
.
One major distinction of my faith; the Iglesia ni Cristo and that of other religious denominations in Christianity is that we do not believe that the scriptures teach Jesus is God or that there is a Trinity. Christians who profess belief in the Trinity often consider John 1:1 to be a central text in their belief that Jesus is God, in connection with the idea that the Father, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit are equals. May I ask, is Jesus God according to John 1:1?
.
If you've studied John 1:1 you know that the Word in Greek is lógos. (KJV w/ Strong's) John 1:1 In the beginning was (5713) the Word , and the Word was (5713) with God , and the Word was (5713) God .
.
3056 lógos (from 3004 /légÅ, "speaking to a conclusion") – a word, being the expression of a thought; a saying. 3056 /lógos ("Word") is preeminently used of Christ (Jn 1:1), expressing the thoughts of the Father through the Spirit.
.
[3056 (lógos) is a common term (used 330 times in the NT) with regards to a person sharing a message (discourse, "communication-speech"). 3056 (lógos) is a broad term meaning "reasoning expressed by words."]
.
Jesus did not live prior to being born of a woman. Please observe John 1:1, in this verse it can be noted that before the foundation of the world, the Word (lógos) is a plan that refers to the firstborn over all creation, Jesus Christ (Col. 1:15) and his saving function; the Word (lógos)does not refer to Christ in the form of a divine being or a God-Man. It is exactly what John described it as, which was a Word (lógos). In laymen terms, the Word (lógos) embodies God's plan of creation and salvation both of which refers to the firstborn over all creation, Jesus Christ (Col. 1:15) not Jesus Christ as a divine being rather a plan (Word) referring to the firstborn over all creation, Jesus Christ (Col. 1:15).
.
What was in the beginning was the Word (lógos), not a divine physical form of Jesus Christ.
.
Example: When constructing a house, the builder doesn't build the house from nothing. Instead, the builder starts with a plan through a set of detailed blueprinted for that house. In the same essence that before the foundation of the world, God had a plan identified though His (Word). In this plan or expression of thoughts (Word) we can come to a true understanding that God's Word refers to the firstborn over all creation, Jesus Christ (Col. 1:15)
.
Why then did Apostle Paul state in John 1:1 " the Word was God "? It is because God is almighty or powerful (Genesis 35:11), and so are HIS words (Luke 1:37).
.
Thus, "the Word was God" indeed. But not in the sense that the "Word" is another divine being (i.e. Jesus Christ) aside from God the Father, rather that the (Word) possesses the qualities and attributes of God the Father. In John 1:1c the word "God" in the clause "the Word was God" should not be understood as a noun but as an adjective to describe the Word. This was Paul's intent of the usage of the word "God" in the clause "the Word was God". This is why in other renditions of the Bible such as Moffatt and Goodspeed John 1:1c states: "The Word was divine".
.
Emphasis: The Word embodies God's plan of creation and salvation both of which have to do with our Lord Jesus Christ. (i.e. "the Word was God")
.
Contradiction: If the reader understands John 1:1c to mean that Jesus (in divine human form) was God, then you jeopardize John 1:1b, because it would mean that Jesus (in divine human form) was with God, Jesus who is God was with the Father who is God. "the God was with God". How many Gods are there in John 1:1b if you believe that the (Word) is Jesus in the form of a divine being? It would then be understood as: and the God (Jesus) was with God (Father)? That would suggest the erroneous concept of two Gods. Obviously that is far from the truth.
.
So what does John 1:14 mean?
.
What does the clause "And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us" mean then? The "Word" which embodied God's plan of creation and salvation as well as a reference of Jesus Christ in the beginning was fulfilled when Mary gave birth to Jesus (Galatians 4:4) who is "truly human" or Man (1 Tim. 2:5). We should not forget that it was the "Word" which became flesh and not God himself.
.
Therefore John 1:1,14 does not in anyway teach or support the pre-existence of Christ as a divine being or that Christ is God or another God or a God-Man. Or that God became a Man or that God is Christ incarnate. The "expression of thought - "lógos" or Word became flesh or was fulfilled, as a result we get Jesus Christ who dwelt among us. It does not say God became flesh and dwelt among us. That's scripturally inaccurate.
.
John did not and would not identify or equate Jesus with the true God in John 1:1, because elsewhere in the Fourth Gospel, he reported Christ to have said unequivocally he is a Man telling the truth (John 8:40)
John did not and would not call Jesus Christ "God" in John 1:1, because elsewhere he narrated the incident where Jesus Christ affirmed in no uncertain terms that the Father is the only true God...(John 17:1,3)
John 17:1 Jesus spoke these words, lifted up His eyes to heaven, and said: "Father, the hour has come. Glorify Your Son, that Your Son also may glorify You, 2 "as You have given Him authority over all flesh, that He should give eternal life to as many as You have given Him. 3 "And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent.
.
According to Jesus Christ, Eternal life is to know that the Father is the only true God, secondly that Jesus was sent by the only true God, the Father. However, it does not express the notion that eternal life is to know Jesus and the Holy Spirit are the only true God, that would be a contradiction.
.
John and the rest of the Apostles did not and would not call Jesus Christ "Father" in the scriptures, because elsewhere he narrated the incident where Jesus Christ affirmed in no uncertain terms that you must call no man your father on earth but there is for One is your Father which is in Heaven...(Matt. 23:9) This Father is the only true God (John 17:3,1)
.
Lastly, I encourage and implore you to test this out; follow the counsel of 1 John 4:1 My dear friends, do not believe all who claim to have the Spirit, but test them to find out if the spirit they have comes from God. For many false prophets have gone out everywhere.
.
Thank you for reading and God bless.
Ray are you a INC minister?
No, I am not, Bill.
Okay, thank you for the information then, Ray. It's very a interesting and helpful overview of your belief system. Would you say it is an "official" document? One your ministers would approve of?
Just noticing that as per the above, the INC has some interesting parallels in the Muslim faith. Please note that I am a student of comparative religions, and do not mean to denigrate either belief system in any way whatsoever by calling attention to their similarities.
Here is an excerpt from Wikipedia on the Muslim faith as it pertains to their characterization of Jesus Christ:
"In Islam, Jesus (Arabic: عيسى‎ ʿĪsÄ) is considered to be a Messenger of God and the Masih (Messiah) who was sent to guide the Children of Israel (banÄ« isrÄ'Ä«l) with a new scripture, the InjÄ«l or Gospel.[1] The belief in Jesus (and all other messengers of God) is required in Islam, and a requirement of being a Muslim. The Qur'an mentions Jesus twenty-five times, more often, by name, than Muhammad.[2][3] It states that Jesus was born to Mary (Arabic: Maryam) as the result of virginal conception, a miraculous event which occurred by the decree of God (Arabic: Allah). To aid in his ministry to the Jewish people, Jesus was given the ability to perform miracles (such as healing the blind, bringing dead people back to life, etc.), all by the permission of God rather than of his own power. According to the popular opinion and Muslim traditions, Jesus was not crucified but instead, he was raised up by God unto the heavens. This "raising" is understood to mean through bodily ascension.
Muslims believe that Jesus will return to earth near the day of judgment to restore justice and to defeat Masih ad-Dajjal ("the false messiah", also known as the Antichrist).[4][5]
Like all prophets in Islam, Jesus is considered to have been a Muslim (i.e., one who submits to the will of God), as he preached that his followers should adopt the "straight path" as commanded by God. Islam rejects the Christian view that Jesus was God incarnate or the son of God, that he was ever crucified or resurrected, or that he ever atoned for the sins of mankind. The Qur'an says that Jesus himself never claimed any of these things, and it furthermore indicates that Jesus will deny having ever claimed divinity at the Last Judgment, and God will vindicate him.[6] The Qur'an emphasizes that Jesus was a mortal human being who, like all other prophets, had been divinely chosen to spread God's message. Islamic texts forbid the association of partners with God (shirk), emphasizing a strict notion of monotheism (tawhīd).
Numerous titles are given to Jesus in the Qur'an and in Islamic literature, the most common being al-Masīḥ ("the messiah). Jesus is also, at times, called "Seal of the Israelite Prophets", because, in general Muslim belief, Jesus was the last prophet sent by God to guide the Children of Israel. Jesus is seen in Islam as a precursor to Muhammad, and is believed by Muslims to have foretold the latter's coming.
Your welcome Bill and God Bless you! I would say "yes" its official. Something an INC minister would approve of. I think you will find this episode of an INC TV program helpful in your research: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NzuKIsGDtR8
.
If I may I would like to share with you just a few more of our fundamental doctrines this help you understand the validity of my faith. I think it's important that you know that we do not force our teachings upon any individual; our mission and goal is to share the Iglesia ni Cristo faith and challenge those curious to test our Spirit as per John 4:1.
.
BIBLE AS BASIS OF FAITH. The Iglesia Ni Cristo regards the Holy Scriptures as the sole basis of its faith and practice. Some of its fundamental scriptural teachings are as follows:
.
ABSOLUTE ONENESS OF THE FATHER. The Church believes in the teaching of Christ and the apostles that the Father, teh Creator, alone is God. (John 12:1, 3; I Cor. 8:6)
.
JESUS CHRIST, THE SON OF GOD.The Iglesia Ni Cristo believes in Jesus Christ as the Son of God. God made Him Lord and Savior. He is the only Mediator of man to God. Jesus Christ is holy and very special man but not God. (Matt. 3:17; Acts 2:36; 5:31; I Tim. 2:5; John 10:36 8:40; Acts 2:22 Easy-to-Read Version.)
.
THE CHURCH OF CHRIST. The faithful firmly believe that the Church of Christ is the one Christ established for the salvation of mankind. It is for the Church that Christ gave His Life and thus, it is this Church that He will save on Judgement Day. (Matt.16:18; Acts 20:28, Lamsa Translation, Eph.5:23, 25)
.
JUDGEMENT DAY. The Church of Christ believes that God appointed a day when He will judge all people through Christ. This is the day of the Second Advent of Christ, which is also the end of the world. (Acts17:31; Jude 1:14; II Pet.3:7, 10)
.
BAPTISM. The Iglesia ni Cristo observes the biblical way of baptism, which is immersion in water. Receiving baptism in the Church of Christ is necessary for one to become a disciple of Christ, to be foriven of sin, and to have hope for salvation. (Acts 8:38; John 3:23; Rom. 6:3-5; Matt. 28:19; Acts 2:38; Mark 16:15-16)
.
RESURRECTION. The resurrection of Christ is the main proof that the dead will rise. Those in Christ will rise first to be with Him forever in the Holy City. Those who are not of Christ will rise a thousand years after the first resurrection to be cast into the lake of fire. (I Cor.15:12-13; I Thess. 4:16-17; Rev.20:5-10, 21:1-4)
.
UNITY. The Church of Christ is one in faith and practice. Its unity remains intact through centralized form of administration that ensures the adherence of all members and congregations to the same Bible teachings and Church rules.
.
MORALITY AND HOLINESS. The Iglesia Ni Cristo strives to maintain a high moral standard. It regards the teaching of the Bible as a way of life. It promotes purity of life among its members by means of instructions, reminders, and, when necessary, corrective or disciplinary measures.
.
PEACE AND ORDER. The Church of Christ helps maintain peace and orderby teaching its members t respect and observe rules and regulations governing such. They are dissuaded from joining unions and organizations that resort to violence or extra-legal means to advance their causes.
.
LAWFULLNESS AND DISCIPLINE. The Church puts a premium and lawfulness and discipline. It complies with apostolic teaching to submit to human authority, that is, the duly constituted government, and abide by its law (Titus 3:1; Pet. 2:13). But over and above any law, its members obey the laws of God for Christians in our time as written in the Bible.
.
BROTHERHOOD AND EQUALITY OF MEMBERS. The Iglesia Ni Cristo promotes Christian brotherly love. All members are deemed equal in the sight of God (Gal. 3:26, 28). Gender, racial, social, educational, and economic discriminations are strongly discouraged.
.
SANCTITY OF MARRIAGE. Marriage in the Church of Christ is regarded as sacred and inviolable. It is God Himself who instituted marriage and He does not allow the separation as a solution to marital problems in the same way that it opposes live-in relationships ans same-sex marriage.
.
STABILITY OF THE FAMILY. The Church of Christ acknowledges the importance of family as the basic unit of its organization and of society as a whole. The stability of every family contributes to the stability of the entire Church. The home is where religious education begins so Christian parenting and proper love of children are taught and reinforced at every opportune time.
.
SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE. The Church of Christ upholds the democratic ideal of separation of Church and State. It advances through peaceful and legal means the right and freedom of its members and congregations to conduct worship and other religious activities as provided for and protected by the fundamental law of the land.
For those curious about the INC here is great topic covered in this episode of "The Message" a INC TV Program. Thank you for watching and God Bless.
.
The Message: What does it mean to be a Christian?
.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=egDwmwSxEyQ&feature=related
Dear Eugenio,
.
God bless you. I love your attitude of working together and sharing. Many of our doctrines that attract so many of our converts are available online. Salvation is discussed numerous times in a unique format.
.
Simply, Log onto http://www.iglesianicristo.ws You will find a wide-array of topics; each dedicated to an episode of the TV Program. “The Iglesia ni Cristo and the Bible†The hosts are ministers of the faith and notice that they do NOT spoon-feed you their personal opinion(s) but give you clear answers with the use of the Bible. For those of you unfamiliar with the doctrines of the Iglesia ni Cristo this would be a good place to start. You don’t see topics like these addressed with many faiths today.
.
Always remember to test the spirit of the INC. As is instructed in 1 John 4:1
All right, enough proselytizing and happy talk. At the point where INC says Jesus is just a man, INC is on the same footing as the atheist who writes this blog. INC is not a Christian church. At the point where INC is run by the same family for three generations and demands political obedience from its members, it behaves dangerously like a cult. INC is not special; it's just another flim-flam game, cloaking itself in false promises of cosmic uniqueness. The clasic sign of being wrong is believing that you possess some magical truth that no one else does. That's INC.
I don't know, Cory.
There are a lot of Christian denominations that don't think Jesus was divine or the Trinity concept valid. They are decidedly non-Catholic, but I wouldn't go so far as to declare them non-Christian. They certainly think they are.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unitarianism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mormons
Notice that Ralph Waldo Emerson, Thomas Jefferson, Susan B. Anthony, Flrence Nightengale, John Locke, John Adams, Albert Schweitzer, and Frank Lloyd Wright were all Unitarians. And they considered themselves Christians.
I don't think we get to decide who's Christian and who's not.
Personally, I don't think you're really an atheist, but you insist that you are, so I'm going along with it, figuring bottom line, it's your call, not mine. ;^)
On the other hand...
“Everybody is an atheist in saying that there is a god - from Ra to Shiva - in which he does not believe. All that the serious and objective atheist does is to take the next step and to say that there is just one more god to disbelieve in.†― Richard Dawkins
Dear caheidelberger,
.
"At the point where INC says Jesus is just a man, INC is on the same footing as the atheist who writes this blog."
.
I highly respect your opinion. But we believe the following about he Savior Jesus Christ.
.
JESUS CHRIST, THE SON OF GOD.The Iglesia Ni Cristo believes in Jesus Christ as the Son of God. God made Him Lord and Savior. He is the only Mediator of man to God. Jesus Christ is holy and very special man but not God. (Matt. 3:17; Acts 2:36; 5:31; I Tim. 2:5; John 10:36 8:40; Acts 2:22 Easy-to-Read Version.)
.
But we do not subscribe to the belief that Christ is God-Man. He is man in nature according to His own testimony (John 8:40) and the teachings of His Apostles (I Timothy 2:5; Matthew 1:18).
.
The attributes of a human being were found in Christ. He hungered (Matthew 4:2), thirsted (John 19:28), became weary or tired (John 4:6), slept (Matthew 8:24), and died (Matthew 27:50; I Corinthians 15:3). However, Christ as distinct from all men, is the only one who did not sin (I Peter 2:21-22; Hebrews 4:15).
.
He has been exalted by God and given a name above all other names, that at the name of Christ every knee should bow, those in heaven, and those on earth (Philippians 2:9-11). He has been placed by God far above all principality, power, might and dominion, and every name that is named, and all things have been put under His feet (Ephesians 1:21-22). Christ will eventually subject all His power and authority to the true God (I Corinthians 15:27-28). He had in so many instances introduced Himself as the Son of God but never did He appropriate the title God nor God the Son for Himself because He is not God but man. Jesus Christ is holy and very special man but not God.
.
You are welcome to cross-reference this with your Bible. I encourage that you test the INC's spirit to see whether it is of God as instructed in 1 John 4:1 to see if what we are saying is true. Remember the Bereans of Acts 17:11?
.
Acts 17:11 The people there were more open-minded than the people in Thessalonica. They listened to the message with great eagerness, and every day they studied the Scriptures to see if what Paul said was really true.
.
God Bless
caheidelberger wrote,
.
"The clasic sign of being wrong is believing that you possess some magical truth that no one else does."
.
Ray's reply:
.
This is exactly why the INC extends the challenge of non-members of the faith in proving us wrong. The INC only asks you to follow the Bible's instructions of 1 John 4:1 where it says,
.
"1 John 4:1 My dear friends, do not believe all who claim to have the Spirit, but test them to find out if the spirit they have comes from God. For many false prophets have gone out everywhere."
.
Before passing judgement on any religious group. Test them to find out if the spirit they have comes from God.
.
God Bless
Wow, 144 posts and most people talking past each other and making wild accusations. Bill and Cory, you did yeoman's work trying to keep the thread on point.
In the end, I discerned the following:
1) INC is not a Christian Faith as historically defined and is essentially
oops hit send accidentally. Let me start continue
modern Arianism.
2) It does hold certain theological views similar to Islam (Christ was a very special creation of God.
3) There is a serious lack of understanding about the history of the Bible. Most notably the source of the Canon.
4) There is a knee-jerk tendency to label a faith other than one's own as a cult.
5) People who assert Sola Scriptura are quick to rely on human interpretation of Scripture, especially recent human interpretation without regard to historical interpretation by even the earliest Christians taught directly by the Apostles or the immediate successors of the Apostles.
I smell sophistry, Brother Ray. You make claims that demonstrate you are not Christian. You assert authoritarian power over your followers in an un-Christlike hierarchy. Then you try to shift the burden of proof to others to show that your claims are wrong. Wrong debate tactic. The burden of proof is yours. You fail to meet it.
I am testing your religious group. I am finding your logic and your morality wanting. I am passing judgment on your incorrect use of the word "Christian," your Scripture-perverting and self-serving condemnation of all non-members, and your cultish oppression of members' freedom of conscience.
Read C.S. Lewis: at the point where you say Jesus is not what he said he was, you are reduced to believing that Jesus was either a liar or a madman. So which is it? Either way, you're not Christian.
If I'm generous, I say that in denying Christ's divinity, you may be Jewish, Muslim, or atheist (all of which are fine). But you render Christianity meaningless, devoid of the power of its central distinguishing claim that the Crucifixion was something more than the execution of one more human radical that created really bad PR for the Roman Empire and the Jews.
And the whole bloc voting scheme is completely unscriptural. Jesus gave no such order. It is pure earthly power grab by the church leaders, rationalized with Bible twists.
"I don’t mind debating you Sibby, but when you say something really stupid, I’m going to tell you for your own good."
Bill, you continue to ignore the Catholic Catechism. I did not write it.
caheidelberger...
Could you kindly attack doctrinal issues of the INC and present them here. Instead of maligning organizational structure.
Everything in the INC is biblically based. Members of my faith can attest to that.
God Bless and am looking forward to some meaningful conversation.
I now invite Ray to take on this argument from Walter Martin:
Throughout the entire content of inspired Scripture the fact of Christ’s identity is clearly taught. He is revealed as Jehovah God in human form (Isaiah 9:6; Micah 5:2; Isaiah 7:14; John 1:14; 8:58; 17:5 [cf. Exodus 3:14]; Hebrews 1:3; Philippians 2:11; Colossians 2:9; and Revelation 1:8, 17–18; etc.). The deity of Jesus Christ is one of the cornerstones of Christianity, and as such has been attacked more vigorously throughout the ages than any other single doctrine of the Christian faith. Adhering to the old Arian heresy of the fourth century A.D., which Athanasius the great church Father refuted in his famous essay “On the Incarnation of the Word,†many individuals and all cults steadfastly deny the equality of Jesus Christ with God the Father, and, consequently, the Triune deity. Jehovah’s Witnesses, as has been observed, are no exception to this infamous rule. However, the testimony of the Scriptures stands sure, and the above mentioned references alone put to silence forever this blasphemous heresy, which in the power of Satan himself deceives many with its “deceitful handling of the Word of God.â€
The deity of Christ, then, is a prime answer to Jehovah’s Witnesses, for if the Trinity is a reality, which it is, if Jesus and Jehovah are “One†and the same, then the whole framework of the cult collapses into a heap of shattered, disconnected doctrines incapable of even a semblance of congruity. We will now consider the verses in question, and their bearing on the matter.
1.(a)Isaiah 7:14. “Therefore the Lord [Jehovah] himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel†(literally, “God†or “Jehovah with us,†since Jehovah is the only God).
(b)Isaiah 9:6. “For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.â€
(c)Micah 5:2. “But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.â€
Within the realm of Old Testament Scripture, Jehovah, the Lord of Hosts, has revealed His plan to appear in human form and has fulfilled the several prophecies concerning this miracle in the person of Jesus Christ. Examination of the above listed texts will more than convince the unbiased student of Scripture that Jehovah has kept His promises and did become man, literally “God with us†(Matthew 1:23; Luke 1:32–33; John 1:14).
The key to Isaiah 7:14 is the divine name “Immanuel,†which can only be rightly rendered “God with usâ€; and since there is no other God but Jehovah by His own declaration (Isaiah 43:10–11), therefore Jesus Christ and Jehovah God are of the same Substance in power and eternity, hence equal. This prophecy was fulfilled in Matthew 1:22–23; thus there can be no doubt that Jesus Christ is the son of the virgin so distinctly portrayed in Isaiah 7:14.
http://www.waltermartin.com/jehwit.html#diety
No, Brother Ray, your organizational structure that oppresses members' freedom of conscience deserves maligning. I find your internal contradictions of claiming to be Christian yet denying Christ's divinity indicative of sloppy thinking. But really, as an atheist, I have much less at stake in whether people think Jesus is God incarnate than I do in the practical application (and abuse) of organization power and wealth. Your sloppy thinking alarms me, but your accumulation and abuse of worldly power alarms me more, as it suggests that, if you move a bunch of followers to Scenic, you will misuse your power to influence elections and policy here in South Dakota.
So just what are you going to do with Scenic? Will you be building a settlement? Will you be taking the town off the tax rolls?
Dear Cory,
If you go to http://www.iglesianicristo.ws or watch any of the links I have provided; you can find email addresses and such.
Your questions can even be featured on an upcoming TV episode of an INC TV program.
God bless.
But my questions won't be answered. You face a fundamental contradiction and your perpetrate unscriptural political power grabs for the benefit of an exclusive power elite. INC is about control and earthly power, not salvation. Ugh.
"You face a fundamental contradiction and your perpetrate unscriptural political power grabs for the benefit of an exclusive power elite."
Cory,
Sounds like situation in England with the Pope during the 16th century.
We can go ahead and call this group Christian as we do other religions with false teachings. Again Jesus warned us in Mathew 24:4. We have another religion that starts its name with the Church of Jesus christ and they have the front-runner for the GOP nomination for President.
Cory, earlier in the thread some of the members noted that they are not willing to discuss scripture or their theology at deep levels. They stated that only their ministers were qualified to do that.
That's why I asked Ray if he's a minister, and he told me he was not. So I wouldn't expect any rebuttal from him. Just his offering of doctrine. I'm guessing he's not going to defend it. He will instead want to introduce you to a minister who will.
...
Sibby, please note Troy's comment. He is a devout, practicing Catholic who is clearly willing to discuss scripture, think about it, and draw his own conclusions. You now have two prima facie examples providing direct refutation of your claim (Troy and I are both Catholics).
You should maybe drop the case, counsellor.
Because, trust me buddy, your trying to convince both Troy and I that you know what we think better than we do would be a fool's errand. ;^)
Then he'd better put a minister on the line. The non-responses throughout only confirm the gaps in this group's logic and trustworthiness.
Ooof... bad grammer... let me correct it :
"your trying to convince both Troy and ME..." Sorry.
*...objective case pronoun, Bill... think, think, think! :^) *
I hear ya, Cory.
"Sibby, please note Troy’s comment. He is a devout, practicing Catholic who is clearly willing to discuss scripture, think about it, and draw his own conclusions."
Bill,
Sorry for giving the wrong impression. The history that I bring forward is not meant to denigrate practicing Catholics. It is meant to educate them and others on the leadership of their Church. We should also keep that in mind with members of the INC. They need to be warned on those who put "men" above Biblical Doctrine. This "Messenger" thing is very troubling.
And I would like to note differences between the First Century Catholic Church and the "Roman Catholic Church". I have not yet fully researched that, but I have run accross those who make a distinction.
Marty Two Bulls: http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2011/09/marty-two-bulls-born-martian/
Troy, Sibby's claim is that you and I (and by extension, all Catholics) are obliged to think the way the Popes, Bishops and Cardinals do. i.e. that we are spiritual/intellectual automatons, subject to the absolute authority of Church hierarchy and dogma, and as such cannot be free thinkers (unless of course we leave the faith).
Isn't that position, Sibby?
If not, please clarify.
Steve,
This thread is about INC and I'd prefer not to have it transition into a debate about theology etc. within the broad Christian community. Don't get me wrong, I am not afraid of the debate as my church maintains the same theology, practices and organization structure as in the first century.
Within the Christian community which recognizes the divinity of Christ, we should be united with regard to INC. It is a reincarnation of Arianism, it appears as Cory points out to demand sovrienty over one's conscience (defined not as used in the common vernacular but the in-dwelling of the Holy Spirit), and claims a broad claim of infallibility regarding Scripture contrary to Christian history.
This said, I'm not sure any of these items are matters within anyone's concern (except personal our call to evangalize the truth). What is within our concern is to the extent/possibility the community of Scenic may become a place where certain Constitutional freedoms may become denied.
So, I ask members of INC to answer this:
1) Will members of the community be able to leave as freely as members of Catholic orders, Hudderite or Amish communities?
2) And, while in the community will they be protected against coersion or threats with regard to belief's or leaving the community? In short, is the the only remedy for the community to deal with dissidents expulsion (which I think is legitimate) or are their other remedies?
Hi Cory,
I'm a member of the INC in Australia and when I heard about this purchase I was also curious as to what it might be used for, which is how I ended up at this website.
I'd firstly like to say, that no, Iglesia Ni Cristo is not a cult. And of course, I know you will say that this is what any brain-washed, cult member would say ;) but OK just hear me out...
In reference to your dot points:
1. Strict obedience: Before joining the church, you have to attend 28 bible study lessons, which teach the fundamental doctrines of the church, all based from the bible. Yes, we have rules (such as no drinking of alcohol/taking prohibited drugs, no gambling, no marriage to those not of the same faith etc), but I'm sure all religions do? And it is in these 28 bible studies that you are taught everything you need to know about the church and its beliefs. If you don't like it or don't believe what you hear, no one is forcing you to get baptised. You can walk away.
2. Family business: The church has been administered by the same family since its establishment in 1914. Again, it's all about faith. We members of the INC, believe that Bro. Felix was sent by God to deliver the truth.
3. Christ: According to our teachings from the bible, Christ was a man. Not God. We still worship and give praise to his name. We certainly don't diminish his importance at all - he is Christ - the Son, our Lord, our mediator to the Father, and our Saviour. We recognise only one true God, which is the Father in Heaven.
4. Salvation: We aren't all going to go to Heaven. Even as a member of the INC, I'm not 100 per cent sure that I'm going to be saved because I have my faults and commit sins... But God will save his worthy children when that day comes (and I hope I'm in ;))
5. Attendance: We have two worships service schedules a week, which sounds like a lot but really, it's basically 3-4 hours a week that you offer to God... That's not much at all. What good is joining a church, or in fact, any kind of organisation, if you aren't going to attend? Attendance is compulsory because it is during these worship services that we receive the nourishment of our souls. We believe in faith coupled with works. Yes, you can say you believe in God and Christ and anything you want, but if you don't act according to your beliefs, your 'faith' as as good as dead.
6. Labour Unions: I can't really give any feedback on this, sorry! I could ask my resident minister but it's midnight in Australia right now...
7. Court: Members are encouraged not to take each other to court. The INC is a brotherhood, we are always encouraged to strengthen the bond of brotherhood. If any issues arise, members are encouraged to try sort the issue out themselves, or then seek advice from the church elders (resident ministers or head deacons) if it can't be resolved.
Voting: Another one of the doctrines is about unification. As a brotherhood, we stand firm in our unity.
Any congregation you visit in any country around the world, you will hear the same hymns being sung, the same lesson being taught.
We, along with many other religions, wish to propagate and spread the truth. We all are encouraged to be active in our missionary works by spreading the truth about our church... We do this by leading good Christian lives, being role models in our communities, inviting people to our bible studies and worship services. We of course want to share our faith with everyone but we don't threaten to handcuff people and push them into the chapel by gunpoint if they don't want to listen!
On a sort-of-unrelated note: When you mentioned Jim Jones, I thought of this catchy, summery song... (only because the film clip is kind of creepy and got me to wiki 'Jonestown' when I discovered it the other week), http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAM9diyVRiM&ob=av2n
Believe me, we are no way like that.
Most members of the INC, myself included, were 'offered' (i.e. born in the church). But there are a lot of converts who had joined from other religions after hearing the doctrines. And there are a lot of ex-members who are now in other religions, or maybe none at all because they lost faith, or decided they couldn't live by the doctrines we are taught. Speaking personally as well, it's hard, to live by these 'strict' instructions (especially in a country like Australia where as a Christian, I'm a minority!) but I find my life has more purpose when I live it to serve God.
And back on to the purchase of the land, when I first heard about it, I thought maybe they'd build a hospital, or a school. But that's just my thoughts. If we get a memo, I'll let you know!
That's it for me, just another point of view from a regular girl down under, who happens to be Christian (yes, after reading all the arguments from other posters and yourself, Cory, I still believe I'm a Christian).
Thanks for reading.
PS - I was born in this church but it doesn't mean I am closed minded to other religions. I've travelled heaps and have studied Buddism and Islam and I appreciate their beliefs too. For a while when I was 22, I stopped attending INC worship services... It was a dark time in my life though and it's only when I started going back to church there that I felt 'complete'. Each to their own, I say. Just live and let live.
PPS - I'm not one of these people that troll on the internet and search for articles attacking my religion. This is the first time I've written back in defense of the INC, so yeah, thanks.
[CAH: "our teachings from the Bible"... funny, I thought Jesus himself said he was not just a man.]
Bill,
Not exactly. Their have been Catholics who stood up to the hierarchy. Sadly, many, if not most, do not realize that their are being asked to follow man-made doctrine instead of Scripture. And Protestants and other religions have similiar issues. For example, the New Apostolic Reformation is a Protestant movement whose leaders are in the Knights of Malta, which is part of the Catholic hierarchy. In the name of unity, they are apostles who know more than Scripture. Ecumentalism is a dangerous thing. Is it the Harlot riding the Beast?
With all these recent posts on this article, i have postpone reading anymore Madville until this all stops---there is nothing else appearing on the comment board.
[CAH: Sorry about that, Charlie! I'll let the INC bushwa artists wear themselves out. But when they start trying to swing elections in South Dakota, I'll be blogging them hard!]
Okay, I guess I'll just have to be the only one among us (Troy, Cory and Steve) who is unwilling to deny INC adherents their claim to being Christian.
My position is that they are if they believe that they are.
In closing, I'll offer a quote from James Joyce, who when asked why he continued to defend the Catholic faith over Protestantism, said, "Why would I renounce a coherent absurdity in favor of an incoherent one?"
Sorry, Charlie.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-Wy_BRFElc
Bill,
Sorry, but I too is unwilling to deny their claim anymore than I would Roman Catholics, Mormons, and Jehovah Witnesses. It fulfills Jesus prophecy in Mathew 24:4. Instead of claiming to be a Christian, I instead claim to be a "follower of Jesus Christ". I do so because of the decpetion pointed out in Mathew 24.
I no longer believe Amereica was founded a "Christian Nation". This is more accurate:
The war on Biblical Christianity is spreading like wildfire. After a period of relief from violent rage and overt occultism, the dark forces that flourished centuries ago are again spreading deception in plain sight. Our children's minds are prime targets! Are they prepared to resist it?
The foundations for today's battles were laid by elite western leaders long ago. Many were steeped in the occult visions of high level freemasonry, rosicrucianism), theosophy, and the teachings of Skull and Bones and other secret societies. Their corrupt goals have tarnished every branch of Western society: education, the news and entertainment media -- even churches.
http://www.worldviewweekend.com/worldview-times/print.php?&ArticleID=7632
Okay, fine. Steve. So what church do you belong to? Is there a place in Mitchell where one can go to hear and discuss the ideas you put forth here and on other blogs? Is there a website where people can go to learn more about it? In other words, what is the name of your Church? How many members does it have?
All this on a Filipino church, while there's soldiers being stripped of their voting rights, a Koch-Iran-Keystone connection made, non-violent protests on Wall Street being decried as "unAmerican" by the very people who were holding town halls hostage a few months back - I'm with you, Charlie. Out of here until this is over.
Bill,
If Cory were to assert he was Christian because he thinks Jesus was a good teacher and tries to follow his teachings, would you consider him a Christian? Words and definitions mean something so we can communicate.
Of course, some words phrases are particular (ie Bible believing since belief is particular) and INC, Mormons, Sibby, Catholics, Lutherans all assert they believe in the Bible as God's Revelation yet have discerned different interpretations and not conducive to easy discernment of exactly what that means by the words themselves but need context and further explanation of their particular belief. But, Christian as a term has for 1,800 years meant one thing: Christ is God.
And, if one needs to further clarification on particular beliefs, one can use qualifying words like Lutheran Christian (Lutheran for short) or Catholic Christian to give more detailed discription of beliefs. But to broaden words and terms to be virtually meaningless does not serve any purpose except if the goal of INC or Cory in my example (not accusing you Cory just an example) is to borrow/gain credibility from someone else (isn't this what Lyndon LaRouche did when he called himself a branch of the Democrat Party? How did you react Bill to him calling himself and his views "Democratic"?),
Bill, I am nondenominational. I attend several Churches, including the one in my home. I believe that the Church, the body of Christ, is not under one man-made institution. It is based on the individual.
Eve, Charlie, again, sorry, but all politics is local.
Cory has just moved to the western part of the state, not far from Scenic. I'm even closer in Rapid City, and Scenic is right on the edge of the Pine Ridge Indian reservation. There are plenty of good reasons to be discussing this, both socially and politically.
Well Troy, as you will discover if (you haven't already), I am a liberal.
Further, theologically, I am a monist, not a dualist,.
Ergo, I am more inclined to accept the notion that Jesus is divine than that he is not. But bottom line, I submit that we each CREATE our own worldview and identify with it.
Notice how Sibby is open about having recreated himself numerous times.
My hunch is that he will continue to do so, as will we all. That's evolution on the non-physical level. The evolution of a "meme" as Richard Dawkins describes it, and each of us can only be where we are at any given point in time.
Therefore, if someone chooses to self-identify as a Christian or a Democrat or an atheist or whatever, I have no reason not to take them at their word.
It's not up to me to decide who you think you are.
p.s. Sibby, good answer. I agree.
"I submit that we each CREATE our own worldview and identify with it."
Bill, those who are deceived are having their worldview created for them. That would be most people.
unincorporated communities' powers include boards that manage sewer, water, a constabulatory, and fire protection under the ordinances of Pennington County.
note comment above that members are encouraged not to sue one another. churches enjoy immunity from prosecution in cases within their ranks.
related: http://www.npr.org/2011/10/05/141089062/high-court-considers-disabilities-act-dispute
one of cory's sidebar google ads.
Bill,
Did you know that Felix Manalo is a former Catholic?
No. But that's not surprising. Didn't you say you were too, Sibby?
larry, "immunity"? no, there is no immunity, pls. ask before accusing..i am sorry, i cant write good English,....pls, brother Ray and Digoy Dy, do me a favor regarding larry's statements..pls. correct it..thanks, Gobless to all of you!!!!
I don't comment because I excuse myself for other obligations am accused of unwilling to defend Christ and his church, the INC.
Let me catch up with some of these comments, because it was going to every which way in tangents;
If anyone is still interested I'd like to discuss the message behind Walter Martin's theory of Christ deity.
So, for those of you Trinitarians; would you say Jesus is Jehovah of the OT?
Thank you.
Ray,
Martin said:
"The key to Isaiah 7:14 is the divine name “Immanuel,†which can only be rightly rendered “God with usâ€; and since there is no other God but Jehovah by His own declaration (Isaiah 43:10–11), therefore Jesus Christ and Jehovah God are of the same Substance in power and eternity, hence equal. This prophecy was fulfilled in Matthew 1:22–23; thus there can be no doubt that Jesus Christ is the son of the virgin so distinctly portrayed in Isaiah 7:14."
The "same Substance in power and eternity", does not go as far as to say "Jesus is Jehovah of the OT". So please explain "Immanuel" from Isaiah 7:14.
Ray,
The political left often makes the same mistake that "equal" means being the "same".
this community could pass ordinances that restrict or pose chilling effects on civil liberties.
This is the true church whether you accept it or not. And besides, we just bought the land and why the writer has to say a lot of things about it. Do you know the plan for the Scenic town already? We are law abiding citizens and people, we are God fearing people, don't compare us to Jeff's or Jones'. Those who says they examine the doctrine for couple of hours? really? All those things have biblical references. DONT YOU KNOW THAT? All you have are opinions...This Church is serving God almighty and serving people in times of needs too. Just wait and observe and we are not a cult. The one who said how can you say "Welcome" if you are in the Phils. Why? Can't you say welcome to any association/location (physically and expression of kindness) no matter where you are? You just have nothing to say? Whatever negative you want to say about our church, it does not matter to us. Just ask yourself who among the Church nowadays, in times of recession and economic hardship (Globally) are doing this, building houses of worship, hospitals for the needy? Aid to humanity? Just watch and observe and we are not being forced to attend worship services, its up to every individual and all we can do is to remind them that worshiping God is God's own will. NO forcing to attend, No forcing in offering, and NOT A CULT. We've been around for almost 100 years, and all the success that we are having now is a clear PROOF that God is on our side. Whatever you say will not affect the Church and its continues success, you will just keep on writing negative comments while we are continuing our obligations to Almighty God. The only thing we want you to do is to scrutinize, examine and learn why this Church is so successful.
Fred,
100 years doesn't impress me. Mine has been around for 2,000 years covering the globe.
(Sorry, I couldn't resist.)
[CAH: Touché, Troy. I'm glad you didn't resist.]
Fred,
Can you explain why denying the deity of Jesus is not denying scripture:
In Mal.3:1: “Behold, I will send My messenger, and he shall prepare the way before Me: and the Lord, whom you seek, shall suddenly come to His temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom you delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the LORD of hosts.†Malachi speaks of two messengers- one that will prepare the way for the Lord, this is none other than John the Baptizer who is foretold in Isa.40:3-4. He is, “The voice crying out in the wilderness: prepare the way of the Lord; make straight in the desert a highway for our God.†Mt. 11:10 quotes this as a confirmation of John the Baptizer, the herald of Jesus Christ. “For this is he of whom it is written: 'Behold, I send My messenger before Your face, who will prepare Your way before You.'
Jesus further states in John 15:26 that the Holy Spirit when sent- “the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He will testify of Me.†Can the Spirit of God testify to the world of a man (can only a man be the savior of the world?) Does not the Old Testament tell us whom the savior is? “For I am the LORD your God, the Holy One of Israel, your Savior†(Isa.43:11). “I, even I, am the LORD, and besides Me there is no Savior†(Isa.45:17). The New Testament makes it clear 1 Jn.4:14: “That the Father sent the Son as the Savior of the world.â€
Jesus says he is coming back and He gives us insight into what he means in the book of Revelation which is the unveiling of none other than Jesus Christ. Rev.1:8 Jesus says, “I am the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end,†says the Lord, who is and who was and who is to come the Almighty.†This phrase Alpha and Omega through the book of Revelation correlates to this fact. The title alpha and omega means he is the beginner and end of all things. The word Alpha means he is eternal, he pre-existed and is before all things as in Jn.1:2 “He was in the beginning†with God.
John 10:30-33 when Jesus said “I and My Father are one†(In Greek We are one). Then the Jews took up stones again to stone Him. Jesus answered them, “Many good works I have shown you from My Father. For which of those works do you stone Me?†The Jews answered Him, saying, “For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy, and because You, being a Man, make Yourself God.â€
“You, being a Man, make Yourself God.†The Pharisees did not acknowledge what He was saying about himself but they did understand whom Jesus claimed to be, they rejected it.
This is not the first time they picked up stones (Jn.10). Previously in John 8:58-59 when Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM.†Then they took up stones to throw at Him.â€
http://www.letusreason.org/Trin21.htm
To the members of the INC,
Ask your ministers if they would have joined the Pharisees and throw stones at the one who said that He and His Father are one?
Troy, fair enough. And Cory's "church" has been around 13.7 billion years* (most recent estimate) encompassing the known universe. (Likewise couldn't resist.)
*My assumption here is that Cory is a Scientific Determinist. I could be wrong, of course. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Determinism
Steve wrote,
-
“The key to Isaiah 7:14 is the divine name “Immanuel,†which can only be rightly rendered “God with usâ€; and since there is no other God but Jehovah by His own declaration (Isaiah 43:10–11), therefore Jesus Christ and Jehovah God are of the same Substance in power and eternity, hence equal. This prophecy was fulfilled in Matthew 1:22–23; thus there can be no doubt that Jesus Christ is the son of the virgin so distinctly portrayed in Isaiah 7:14.â€
-
The “same Substance in power and eternityâ€, does not go as far as to say “Jesus is Jehovah of the OTâ€. So please explain “Immanuel†from Isaiah 7:14.
-----------------------------
Ray's reply:
.
Yes, Walter Martin is absolutely correct that the name "Immanuel" translated is "God with us". What's the problem with that?
.
Steve, If you will follow this reasoning then you must also accept the following people in the Bible, God too.
.
ELNATHAN - Means "God has given" in Hebrew. In the Old Testament this was the name of both a grandfather of king Jehoiachin and a son of Akbor.
.
ELKANAH - Means "God has purchased" in Hebrew. In the Old Testament this was the name of the father of Samuel.
.
ISHMAEL - From the Hebrew name יִשְ×מָעֵ×ל (Yishma'el) meaning "God will hear". In the Old Testament this was the name of a son of Abraham. He is the traditional ancestor of the Arabs.
.
ISRAEL - From the Hebrew name יִשְׂרָ×ֵל (Yisra'el) meaning "God contended". In the Old Testament Israel (who was formerly named Jacob; see Genesis 32:28) wrestled with an angel. The ancient and modern states of Israel took their names from him.
.
Shall I continue? Steve, I'm sure you know where I am going with this.
.
If you accept EMMANUEL literally will you then also accept ELNATHAN, ELKANAH, ISHMAEL and ISRAEL as God, too!? Of-course not. Why is EMMANUEL any special?
.
Stephen (Steve) is a masculine first name, derived from the Greek name ΣτÎφανος (Stephanos) meaning "crown, garland"
.
Are you a literal "crown", Steve? Of-course not you man like me.
.
Let's make use of the Bible to find out if Jesus agrees with the notion that He is God. Let's ask the Savior himself. Who is the true God?
.
Let's read:
.
John 17:1 Jesus spoke these words, lifted up His eyes to heaven, and said: "Father, the hour has come. Glorify Your Son, that Your Son also may glorify You,.
.
John 17:3 "And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God,
.
John 17:3d ...and Jesus Christ whom You have sent.
.
The Father is the "ONLY" true God. Do you know what "ONLY" means? Of-course you do.
.
So let's paint a picture that you can identify with and see teh problematic areas of the Trinity and the intercessory prayer of Jesus to God the Father in Jn 17:3,1.
.
Trinitarians believe in God the son, God the Father and God the Holy Spirit, right?
1 out of 3 in the TRINITY is the ONLY TRUE GOD; God the Father.
.
QUESTION: Steve, what kind of God is God the son? What kind of God is Jesus. If the Father as testified by Jesus is the only true God.
.
QUESTION: Steve, what kind of God is God the Holy Spirit? If the Father as testified by Jesus is the only true God?
.
The FATHER is indeed the ONLY TRUE GOD; Jesus Christ was SENT by the ONLY TRUE GOD. GOD THE FATHER.
.
Thanks for reading, Steve. So...do you know what kind of God Jesus is? Or how about the Holy Spirit?
"Let’s make use of the Bible to find out if Jesus agrees with the notion that He is God. Let’s ask the Savior himself. Who is the true God?"
Ray, thanks for your response. Now in response to your question, please go to the comment I left at 14:12 and specifically John 10:30. This will more fully explain how the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are One God:
A.H.Strong; "In the nature of the One God there are three eternal distinctions…and these three are equal. "The doctrine of the Trinity does not on one hand assert that three persons are united as one person, or three beings in one being, or three Gods in one God (tritheism); nor on the other hand that God merely manifests himself in three different ways (modal Trinity of manifestations); but rather that there are three eternal distinctions in the substance of God." (Theology p.144)
The Trinity is not three substances but three persons existing simultaneously, which are the one essence. These person's are not separate from the essence, they subsist in it. Nor are there three essences that would make them three God's. God is tri-une as persons but in nature one God. As Athanasius coined the phrase "not dividing the substance nor confusing the persons."
Each person has a position and a relationship to each other. the essence is not exclusive to only one of these at a time such as the Father and at another time the Son. All three have existed throughout eternity. If the Son owes his existence to the Father, or either change's to become another, then neither of them are eternal or self existent. the essence is not divisible among the distinction's of persons but indivisible. While we must guard against separating the three personages (tritheism ) we must also be aware of the flaw of their being numerically one, they are Distinct but not separate. The church has always maintained the indivisibility of God, being so united that they are three inseparable persons. The traditional doctrine called the perichoresis means the mutual indwelling of the three persons, in that each person permeates the other being united in substance. This guarded against any teaching that there are three separate Gods as in tritheism. That if God were deduced to a mathematical formulae he would not be 1+1+1=3 which would be tritheism, but would be 1x1x1=1, a unified one. None of the persons can exist without the other, they all make up the one God in unity. that each person dwells in the other two which makes God indivisible and unquantifiable, so that wherever one of the persons of God is, all of God is there. What we are not saying is that they separate nor physical.
This is why Jesus is the fullness of the Godhead bodily by himself, God cannot be divided, he is one God in his nature but three in persons. Its not a matter of opinion because this is the only conclusion one can come to from the overall body of literature in the scripture. All three are called God, the Father calls the Son God in Heb.1 the Son calls the Father God. All three simultaneously exist.
http://www.letusreason.org/Trin7.htm
"Steve wrote, "To the members of the INC, Ask your ministers if they would have joined the Pharisees and throw stones at the one who said that He and His Father are one?"
------------
.
Steve, INC does not have a problem with this statement by Jesus. We believe it. The question is. ONE IN WHAT? In substance? In physical form? ONE IN WHAT?
.
Let's go back to the Bible in John 10:30 "I and [My] Father are one." and review this statement in its context.
.
Christ did not say "I and the Father are in ONE GOD." He did not say He is the Father himself. Neither did He say. "I am my Father."
.
If that is what is what Jesus meant then they must be one in number. But Steve, are they [one] in number? John 8:16-18 states: 16 "And yet if I do judge, My judgment is true; for I am not alone, but I [am] with the Father who sent Me. 17 "It is also written in your law that the testimony of two men is true. 18 "I am One who bears witness of Myself, and the Father who sent Me bears witness of Me."
.
As far as a number is concerned, Christ and the Father are two. That makes Christ's Judgement or decision true because He is not alone in making it; there are two of them He and the Father.
.
Therefore based on what you just read from the Bible. Jesus and the Father are ONE in making decisions and judgement.
Steve, I apologize. This is a continuation of my last response.
.
But why did Christ say, I and my Father are one?" In what way are they one? the preceding verse states: 28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any [man] pluck them out of my hand. 29 My Father, which gave [them] me, is greater than all; and no [man] is able to pluck [them] out of my Father's hand. (Jn 10:28-29 KJV)
.
Christ made the affirmation that He and His Father are one in context of caring for the flock. Just as no one can pluck the sheep out of Christ's hand so also no one can pluck the sheep out of the Father's hand. Thus, Christ and His Father are one in the sense that they are united.
.
This brings us to the ineluctable conclusion that Christ is not and never has been the true God. He is the Son of God, the Savior, the Head of the Church, the Mediator, the Lord, and everything that God made Him to be, but He is a man. The true Christ is a man, not a God.
.
This is what is meant in John 10:30, Steve.
Ray,
The Pharisees' conclusion was not the same as yours. And the Scriptures has no mention that Jesus corrected their interpretation. I pray that you understand the research I presented at the comment 14:29.
Thank you for your serious discussion. This is an important point. Denying the Deity of Jesus, can be used to denigrate Him. It also allows for humans to say they can become Christ.
Sibby and Ray, nice discussion.
I only wish to suggest, as you go through your eschatology regarding the divinity or non-divinity of Jesus that none of what you're arguing has any relevance to anyone whatsoever if you fail to include yourselves (humanity).
That's where the Holy Spirit comes in, isn't it? i.e. Isn't the whole idea that we become ONE in the Spirit? Isn't that the "Good News" of the Gospel(s)?
Or am I missing something?
Bill,
As "believers" we become one in spirit. But that does not mean we are god too. Paul had a huge problem with in-fighting. He seemed to blame the false teachers. That is what we need to be on watch for today.
Then we have John 20:28 where Thomas sees Jesus after the resurection:
Thomas said to him, "My Lord and my God!"
Okay, Steve. But then haven't you painted yourself into a corner with your "oneness" argument then? How do you become "one" in the Spirit and end up with more than one? I don't get it. If the Holy Spirit doesn't include you, then what's the point?
I'm going to go out on a limb here and submit that when it comes to religion and spirituality as far as human beings is concerned, the Holy Spirit is the WHOLE point.
Correspondingly, virtually all of the world's religious disciplines make reference to it in some way or another, going back more years than some are willing to admit than there have been since creation.
Now, as far as the Christian Gospels go, the oldest known manuscript is the book of Mark. And here's what Mark has to say about all of this:
Mark 3:28-30: “Truly I tell you, people will be forgiven all their sins and all the blasphemies they utter. But whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven, but is guilty of an eternal sin. He said this because they [the Pharisees] were saying, ‘He has an evil spirit’.â€
...and then Matthew and Luke:
Matthew 12:30-32: “Whoever is not with me is against me, and whoever does not gather with me scatters. And so I tell you, people will be forgiven every sin and blasphemy. But the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.â€
Luke 12:8-10: “I tell you, whoever acknowledges me before men, the Son of Man will also acknowledge him before the angels of God. But he who disowns me before men will be disowned before the angels of God. And everyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven.â€
So guys, the point is, you are totally having the wrong argument.
Think about it.
One or the other of you is denying the Holy Spirit in the other.
Do you really think that's a good idea?
On of my main teachers has been Mohandas Gandhi.
Gandhi said, "I am a Christian, a Hindu, a Muslim, and a Jew."
Personally, I think he was onto something there.
Of course, Gandhi was a Hindu by birth, Hindu and Sikh actually, and of course, the Hindus assassinated him for saying what he did.
So it goes.
Proof? Ha! Lots of things have been around for 100 years, with no indication whatsoever that God favors or disfavors them. What cultish absurdity.
I'm leaving this conversation now, friends. I have no more to add (or subtract). Thank you all for sharing all your thoughts. It has been quite enlightening.
"How do you become “one†in the Spirit and end up with more than one? I don’t get it. If the Holy Spirit doesn’t include you, then what’s the point?"
Bill, Jesus said that if we believe in Him, then thru the Father we will have the Holy Spirit. Sorry if that flies in the face of cosmic humanism.
You didn't answer the question, Steve.
Fred,
100 years doesn’t impress me. Mine has been around for 2,000 years covering the globe.
(Sorry, I couldn’t resist.)
[CAH: Touché, Troy. I'm glad you didn't resist.]
------------------------------------------------
My response to Troy: Yes 2,000 years and yes its global, but you have to admit that its very sad knowing that the church heavily relied on the sword to make that happen with the expense of many lives.
caheidelberger, I find it interesting how you're worried about how the INC will effect the South Dakota community. I don't think that you should worry, many big cities have awarded the Church Of Christ/INC for their community service efforts. Also, their charitable donations have been acknowledged by many, for 100% of what is donated really do go to those who are needy, and not just a percentage.
You may disagree with what they believe, but take the time to get to know them. They are far from intimidating and threatening. You may be surprised with how genuinely kind they really are.
Steve wrote from an earlier entry:
.
"We have to agree that from a Biblical standpoint, there is just one God. The Trinity cannot violate that. There are three personalities within that one God. Just like in one family, there is the father, the mother, and a son. There is still just one family, not three families."
---------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Steve,
.
I hope your still open to discussing this further. I don't think your giving John 17:3,1 the credit it deserves as it is such a pivotal moment in scripture. We can learn so much from it. So, I found your earlier comment above very interesting. Let's say I will follow your line of reasoning here, Steve. 3 personalities compose ONE God. That's the "Trinity"
.
Father + Jesus + Holy Spirit = Trinity
.
Do you know who the only true God is according to Jesus? Of-course you do. Who can deny the words of Jesus? It's the Father. Do you agree with Jesus, Steve? Let's read verse 3 of John 17:3,1:
.
"And this is eternal life, THAT THEY MAY KNOW YOU, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent.
.
Eternal life is to know the Father. I would say that is very important, would you. I mean com'n "ETERNAL LIFE"?
.
Well, what about the Father is ETERNAL LIFE? Back to verse 3 "And this is eternal life, that they may know you, THE ONLY TRUE GOD...."
.
We must agree with Jesus; that His Father is the ONLY true God. There's nothing wrong with right, Steve? Jesus' Father is the ONLY TRUE GOD, Jesus said so himself. Jesus wouldn't lie. Now let's toss that into the doctrine of the "TRINITY"
.
Father ("only" true God) + Jesus (???) + Holy Spirit (???) = Trinity
.
So, we have 1/3 of the personalities of the "Trinity" as the "only" true God (the Father)
.
Any Bible Scholar/Student will tell you that John and the rest of the Apostles did not and would not call Jesus Christ “FATHER†in the scriptures, because elsewhere he narrated the incident where Jesus Christ affirmed in no uncertain terms that you must call no man your father on earth but there is for One is your Father which is in Heaven…(Matt. 23:9)
.
Father = "only" true God / Jesus = NOT Father. He is ____ / Holy Spirit = NOT Father. It is ____ = "TRINITY"
.
So Steve, what is 2/3's of the personalities of the "Trinity"...?????
.
My faith (INC) believes the following, do you?
.
Father = "only" true God / Jesus = NOT Father therefore NOT God / Holy Spirit = NOT Father therefore NOT GOD = NO "TRINITY"
.
Thanks for reading and God Bless.
Cliff cites no voting issue to save the iNC from the argument I'm making. The effort to blacken the rest of Christianity with the comment about "the sword" does not change the fact that the INC rejects fundamental Christian doctrine and thus might as well convert to Judaism or atheism. The "sword" comment does not negate the fact that the INC is at least as obsessed, if not more obsessed, with earthly power and control of its members. I don't need to take time to get to know anyone to understand those plain facts.
"You didn’t answer the question, Steve."
Bill, the answer is Jesus Christ.
Ray,
Thank you for continuing to use Scripture. Yes, John 17 does show Jesus calling the Father the true God. And the Father called His son God in Hebrew 1:8-9:
"8 But about the Son he says,
“Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever;
a scepter of justice will be the scepter of your kingdom.
9 You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness;
therefore God, your God, has set you above your companions
by anointing you with the oil of joy.â€
In John 5, Jesus admitted Himself equal to the Father:
"16 So, because Jesus was doing these things on the Sabbath, the Jewish leaders began to persecute him. 17 In his defense Jesus said to them, “My Father is always at his work to this very day, and I too am working.†18 For this reason they tried all the more to kill him; not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God.
19 Jesus gave them this answer: “Very truly I tell you, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does. 20 For the Father loves the Son and shows him all he does. Yes, and he will show him even greater works than these, so that you will be amazed. 21 For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, even so the Son gives life to whom he is pleased to give it. 22 Moreover, the Father judges no one, but has entrusted all judgment to the Son, 23 that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. Whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the Father, who sent him."
And then there is this from Titus 2:11-15:
"11 For the grace of God has appeared that offers salvation to all people. 12 It teaches us to say “No†to ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright and godly lives in this present age, 13 while we wait for the blessed hope—the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ, 14 who gave himself for us to redeem us from all wickedness and to purify for himself a people that are his very own, eager to do what is good.
15 These, then, are the things you should teach. Encourage and rebuke with all authority. Do not let anyone despise you."
Jesus is "God and Savior". And I also posted Thomas calling Jesus "My Lord and my God".
Ray, I pray that we can bring understanding to this very important issue thru Scripture.
May God be with you,
Steve
Okay, Sibby, just to be clear (because I think you were trying to defend the Trinity, if I'm not mistaken) your position is that the Godhead (God the Father) is divine, as is his creation.
But the creation is unaware of its divinity and can only be awakened to it by the transmission of the Holy Spirit through the vehicle of Jesus Christ.
Is that correct? i.e. it's kind of like how divinity gets from point G to circle C through the radius J.
In other words, it (the Logos) is a dynamic feedback action, not a static thing. Like a heart pulse maybe.
Is that what you're saying?
Another (close but imperfect) metaphor:
God the Father = Brain
God the Son = Heart
Holy Spirit = Blood
All of the above = The Trinity (The whole being.)
a perfect metaphor: two molecules hydrogen, one molecule oxygen.
Excellent. Good one, Larry. Except those are atoms, not molecules, right?
(See? ...there's always this "language" problem.)
But now that were going into science (physics), how about:
• Strong force.
• Weak force
• Gravity
oops. how about vapor, liquid, ice? sun, earth, water? Dusty Hill, Frank Beard, and Billy Gibbons?
"divine, as is his creation"
Bill, that maybe where we differ. God's nature is divine, and we can see his divine nature thru his creation, but I am not sure we can say his creation is divine. Need to research that.
You are in agreement with John 14:6:
"Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."
ANd then you have John 14:26:
But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.
I think this sums up the tri-une nature of God.
bottom quark (99.8%)
strange quark (0.17%)
down quark (0.007%)
1.1 Hallucinations
1.2 Delusions
1.3 Thought disorder
Yeah, especially that last one, Larry. It's got legs. ;^)
2.1 Small bowel obstruction
2.2 Large bowel obstruction
2.3 Differential diagnosis
Good Sibby. Just want to make sure I understand your point.
It would be difficult for me to see how a perfect God would make an imperfect thing, speaking in absolute terms, but hey, it's your argument, not mine. I'll be interested to see what you come up with in your "research."
Larry, you're killin' me. Good stuff brother.
foreplay
coitus
cigarette
"It would be difficult for me to see how a perfect God would make an imperfect thing, speaking in absolute terms, but hey, it’s your argument, not mine. I’ll be interested to see what you come up with in your “research.â€"
Bill, it was Lucifer who put the wrench into things. And what was the lie...that we can be equal to God, or we can be god too. Pantheism plays into the hands of Lucifer.
1) God
2) evil
3)???
You two need to be careful with your Hegelian Dialectics.
Bill,
What is you take on John 14?
Steve, I think the whole "Lucifer" concept might be exercise in scapegoating, psychologically speaking. It's a way people can avoid having to take personal responsibility for their actions... a way to remain "innocent" and blame the bad side of our nature on something other than what it actually is.
"The Devil made me do it." Yeah, right. Whatever.
Bill, I agree that we are personally responsible for following Jesus Christ or not.
I think John 14 is just fine, Sibby, why?
It shows the whole deal doesn't it?
Specifically, it says:
"12"Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes in me will also do the works that I do; and greater works than these will he do..."
and
"And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Helper,[f] to be with you forever, 17even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him. You know him, for he dwells with you and will be in you."
...in other words, the "world" has yet to wake up to its divine nature. (...consciousness is emerging/evolving).
"I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ." — Gandhi
Bill,
You may want to be careful with Gandhi. The ties to Theosophy, which is the foundation to the New Age Movement, is troubling:
The title "Mahatma" is derived from those who are initiated members of the Theosophical Society but who are already initiated members of Freemasonry. The title means "Great Soul". Gandhi's "London Diary" was his Freemason diary. It was written in Masonic Code. Only 20 pages survive from this book. The rest of the 120 page volume has conveniently disappeared. The 20 pages which survive describe his initiation to the 3rd Degree of Freemasonry.
Why is Gandhi's affiliation with Freemasonry and the Theosophical Society being suppressed? Gandhi went to the Bar and studied law at the Inner Temple, one of the Inns of Court in the City of London, quite a privilege for a person of colour in the late 19th century, late 1880's in point of fact. Student admission was normally reserved for landed gentry and aristocrats. How did he luck out?
Why was Gandhi in touch with the head of the Muslim League, a known terrorist organization? And why was this organization based in London? It is well known that MI6 and British Freemasonry were behind the creation of the Muslim Brotherhood, generally regarded as Islamic Freemasonry, which boasts known terrorists like Osama bin Laden among its membership. It is also well known that the CIA was behind the creation of al-Qaeda, the Mujahaddin and the Taliban. Why did Gandhi exchange letters with the head of the Muslim League and then deny having done so to the Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of England, Lord Ampthill? Why did Lord Ampthill write the foreword to the first biography on Gandhi, written by Freemason Rev. J.J. Doke. the Editor of Gandhi's Indian Opinion newspaper?
http://www.conspiracyculture.com/events_Gandhi.html
Yes, "mahatma" means "Great Soul." Sibby. It's similar to the word "saint."
But it's sanskrit. An ancient word. Gandhi was a Hindu from India, remember?
And the Theosophists borrowed a lot of their ideas from the Hindus, not vice versa.
Again, I have to ask you why you are so negative and paranoid about these things.
Do you not think Gandhi received the Holy Spirit? How in the world would you know, Steve?
Bill,
My concern is the influence of Lucifer on the Theosophists:
Please notice that Helena Petrovna Blavatsky founded the Theosophical Society in 1875. Her most popular work was a two-volume book she wrote titled 'The Secret Doctrine,' in which she woefully states...
"Lucifer represents.. Life.. Thought.. Progress.. Civilization.. Liberty.. Independence.. Lucifer is the Logos.. the Serpent, the Savior." pages 171, 225, 255 (Volume II)
"It is Satan who is the God of our planet and the only God." pages 215, 216, 220, 245, 255, 533, (VI)
"The Celestial Virgin which thus becomes the Mother of Gods and Devils at one and the same time; for she is the ever-loving beneficent Deity...but in antiquity and reality Lucifer or Luciferius is the name. Lucifer is divine and terrestrial Light, 'the Holy Ghost' and 'Satan' at one and the same time." page 539
Helena Petrovna Blavatsky 32° Co-Freemason
The Secret Doctrine
Clearly, Helena Blavatsky was a devout Satan worshipper, and an enemy of the cross of Jesus Christ. She is also one of the pioneers of today's occult New Age Movement...
Beginning in the early to mid-Nineteenth Century, and with the incorporation of Eastern mystical concepts into the existing traditions, the Western Mystery Tradition experienced a major divergence between the esoteric Hermetic rites of the Masonic and Rosicrucian traditions, and the Theosophical schools (with the major divergence occurring during the life of Madame Blavatsky) that came to be grouped under the general rubric of New Age spirituality.
SOURCE: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_mystery_tradition
Theosophy, Satan worship, New Age, Freemasonry, and witchcraft are inseparable. They all hate God, hate the Word of God, and are committed to a one-world order, i.e., the Beast system of the coming Antichrist.
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/False%20Religions/New%20Age/theosophy.htm
...and of course you have no first hand knowledge of any of this, right, Steve? Only what you read on paranoid conspiracy theory websites?
Bill,
I was a New Ager, and did not even know it. Just trying to warn others. It is up to you to take heed or not.
Did you read the Secret Doctrine, Steve? The Upanishads? The Gita? The Koran? The Zohar? Have you read any of those books? How about the Tibetan Book of the Dead and the Tao de Ching? Plato's Apology of Socrates?
I fail to see how someone could be a "New Ager" and not even know it, unless of course the term "New Ager" is meaningless (which it is.)
There are so many definitions of it that they all cancel each other out.
What you are really talking about is called "Esoteric."
And one can be either an "esotericist" or an "esoterologist."
So, which were you, Sibby?
(p.s. I have studied all of the above books and would classify myself as the latter, an esoterologist, albeit an amateur one.)
Bill, I did get to the high levels. I made it to the hippy stage. The book I spent the most time was the Urantia Book. Read much of it twice.
"Secret Doctrine, Steve?"
"Please notice that Helena Petrovna Blavatsky founded the Theosophical Society in 1875. Her most popular work was a two-volume book she wrote titled ‘The Secret Doctrine,’ in which she woefully states…
“Lucifer represents.. Life.. Thought.. Progress.. Civilization.. Liberty.. Independence.. Lucifer is the Logos.. the Serpent, the Savior.†pages 171, 225, 255 (Volume II)
“It is Satan who is the God of our planet and the only God.†pages 215, 216, 220, 245, 255, 533, (VI)
“The Celestial Virgin which thus becomes the Mother of Gods and Devils at one and the same time; for she is the ever-loving beneficent Deity…but in antiquity and reality Lucifer or Luciferius is the name. Lucifer is divine and terrestrial Light, ‘the Holy Ghost’ and ‘Satan’ at one and the same time.†page 539"
Pretty scary stuff Bill!!
I thought a lot of it was kind of weird, much like the Urantia book. A lot of information, and no way to prove it, one way or the other. I can tell you, though, that there are a great many scholars who understand the term Lucifer far better than it appears you do, Sibby. Maybe you should look it up before you start drawing conclusions. As with many of your current flock of ideas, you kind of have the cart going before the horse.
"I can tell you, though, that there are a great many scholars who understand the term Lucifer far better than it appears you do, Sibby."
Bill, my research points to the Catholic's Latin version of the Bible as the source of the confusion. I am open to a discussion as to the real anti-christ. And Mathew 24:4 to be the root.
"In 2 Peter 1:19 and elsewhere, the same Latin word lucifer is used to refer to the Morning Star, with no relation to the devil. In Revelation 22:16, Jesus himself is called the Morning Star, but not "Lucifer", even in Latin."
Right, Steve. Odd as it may seem, the Lucifer reference is to Jesus, not the devil.
[CAH: Holy cow, Bill! That's fun linguistic scholarship! Keep it up!]
"Right, Steve. Odd as it may seem, the Lucifer reference is to Jesus, not the devil."
Bill, is that really the intention of the translators? Or is this one of those anti-christ use of deception?
Bill and Cory, the incorrect reference to Lucifer as the Morning Star does not lead to the conclusion that Jesus is Lucifer. Jesus is the Morning Star. The devil/anti-christ, will be a counterfeit Jesus. The reference in Isaiah is to the fake Morning Star. Again, Mathew 24:4 warns us about those who will say the are christ, but instead deceive many. Seems everything is on course.
AP reports INC's intent on the town remains a complete mystery. The church imposed a non-disclosure agreement on all involved with the sale. Secrecy always makes me uneasy.
mga duwag yan di yan lalaban ng debate.
INC members have an inclination to throw the word "debate" around and issue rhetorical challenges. They must think that most people shrink from public discussion and that they can just keep shouting longer than others to make themselves sound both tough and right.
For the record: when the INC moves to South Dakota and starts building its compound/arena/retreat/rehab center in Scenic, I will happily participate in a public debate with INC officials about their practices and their impact on South Dakota. We must establish clear resolutions and rules for such a debate. I propose the following three resolutions, based on the thesis of the original post above:
1. Iglesia ni Cristo's purchase of Scenic represents a net gain for South Dakota. (I will Negate the resolution.)
2. Denying the divinity of Christ and calling oneself "Christian" are logically consistent positions. (I will Negate the resolution.)
3. Iglesia ni Cristo imposes unChristian control over its members' political and economic rights. (I will Affirm the resolution.)
We can negotiate wording of resolutions for fairness and clarity. Debate over Resolution #1 is contingent on INC's open discussion of its intentions for its Scenic property.
But note: willingness or refusal to participate in a public debate on any of these resolutions does not change the validity of the statements I have made above about the cultish and unChristian behavior of the INC.
caheidelberger marami na kaming hinarap na kagaya mo isa lang masasabi ko sayo hindi mo kaya ang INC kahit ano gawin mo.
"Juan" is a fake name with a fake e-mail address. However, I feel compelled to point out that kahit sa pagsasalin, ang iyong mga komento ay walang laman, "Juan." Ito ay hindi gumagawa ng bagong pahayag, ay hindi address ng anumang partikular na point, at hindi baguhin ang katotohanan na ang Inc denies pangunahing Christian aral at samakatuwid ay hindi maaaring lohikal na tinatawag na "Christian."Ang iyong isa-liner din pinapansin ang katotohanan na nagsasabi ng mga miyembro nilang pumunta sa simbahan at sa boto ang paraan na ang mga iglesya bosses na sabihin sa kanila ay lumalabag sa Biblia at ang Estados Unidos Saligang-Batas. [Tagalog courtesy of Google Translate... which is no more of a robot than "Juan"]
Uy, Cory, medyo makisig. Siguro kung ang mga Inc mga tao ay kailanman pagpunta upang magbigay ng up sa thread na ito. Mahalagang Sila threw sa ang towell kapag sinabi nila hindi sila pinapayagang debate ang anumang ng materyal na ito sa amin sa isang malalim na antas. Sila ay nagsasalita ng kanilang magagawang cruch ang mga hamon sa kanila, ngunit kaya ngayon ay may lamang napatunayan na ang lahat ng alam nila kung paano gawin ay upang alisan ng karapatan ang kanilang sarili mula sa meaniful talakayan bago ito kailanman ay nagsisimula. Ako nagsisimula sa palagay ito ay pinakamahusay na para sa kanila na manirahan sa isang maliit na bayan na malayo mula sa mga tao na maaaring curous tungkol sa kanilang mga paniniwala system, dahil ito ay naging lubos na malinaw na ang pagpapahinto sa pamamagitan ng kanilang mga hous na magkaroon ng isang talakayan tungkol sa anumang ngunit ang pinaka-pansimula paksa ay susunod sa imposible. Ang posibilidad ng kusa, sunud-sunod na intelektuwal na palitan sa kanila ay tila halos di-existant. Masyadong masama.
Bill, ang aking mahal na kaibigan, Pinapahalagahan ko ang iyong pananaw sa thread na ito.Tila ang mga ito ay kaya pasalungat sa kanilang mga sabik na mga imbitasyon para sa pampublikong debate pa ang kanilang mga agarang weaseling out nito kapag pipi dito sa publiko.Oh rin.Kapag nagsimula sila sa paglipat tagasunod sa ng dulaan, ako ay tamasahin ang paglalaan ng isang roadtrip, plunking aking sarili down sa lokal na salon, at record ng mga interbyu para sa isang serye ng Madville Times video.Dapat ay kawili-wiling!
Oo, na lubhang kawili-wiling, Cory. At marahil nakakatawa din. Pumunta para dito, kapatid na lalaki.
Ang gawin, Bill! Kung nakikita mo ang anumang kakaibang mga caravans ng mga tao malalim sa sa panalangin heading silangan ng Rapid sa 44, ipaalam sa akin! :-)
...At ipaalam ang makita kung gaano katagal aabutin ang Inc upang malaman ang pag-uyam sa lakad sa mga huling ilang mga komento. Akong magkaroon ng isang pakiramdam ng INC hierarchy at mga tagasunod kapwa kakulangan ng isang pagkamapagpatawa.
Cory,
I'm from Texas, if I may since you are branding and assuming us that we are a cult... as much as people who reads your article will assumed that it was written by a "No Good Redneck or a WT". Of course, that is only a perception. I am sure that is not true... Anyway, we invite you to come and join us in our regular worship services. Observe us, ask questions, share your viewpoints... we will be glad to explain our doctrines that you and your followers highly object. You have the courage to write such a vicious article about us, I hope you will also have the courage to back up your article by visiting our Congregation nearest to you. Many churches including the Catholics, the Protestants, Baptists etc... have challenged us into a live and formal debates... we gladly accepted it.... Any church who is known as a cult will deliberately refused such debate, but we don't.
We have nothing to hide. The Iglesia Ni Cristo (Church of Christ) is an open book.
Here is our regular worldwide TV network:
If you have DirecTV, please tune it to channel 2068.
http://www.net-25.com/
http://www.gemnet.tv/index.html
OUR DIRECTORY IN THE USA
http://www.iglesianicristo.ws/congregation/North%20America.htm
Again .. We are not anything like DAVID KORESH.
The fact that INC isn't as bad as the worst cult you can think of doesn't negate the claims I actually made, that INC can't coherently call itself Christian and that it unjustly and un-Christianly oppresses its members. Next.
People like you who haven't heard the doctrines of INC always readily makes baseless conclusions. I hope that before you say hurtful & viscious things you'd think for a moment what would it be like if I were at the receiving end? People criticize the INC because of her UNITY doctrine which is very apparent during elections. People say that because of this INC members have no free will. Well, to tell you the truth, members are free NOT TO FOLLOW & no one's watching them at the voting precints & because we believe & accepted the doctrines taught to us, WE FOLLOW.
I think you're just being paranoid for being uneasy just because the INCs
plan for SCENIC is not yet divulged (which was also the case when INC bought 75 hectares of land in Bulacan, Philippines where they would build a new "city" dubbed as Ciudad de Victoria. Because the secret was well kept, when the plan was finally unveiled it was a huge surprise.)
As a member of INC, I think it would be safe to say that perhaps SCENIC will be turned into a community where families of retiring ministers & volunteer church workers will be housed just like many of the INC communities here in the Philippines or perhaps the INC administration is also planning to build here the US Headquartes, who knows so we'd better just wait & see.
Thanks
The INC also teaches that if there are misunderstandings among brethren, it should be resolved amicably among brethren instead of going directly to court which is very common among Americans & other western cultures wherein there seems to be no importance given to family ties (where are your old people living? with you or neglected at the home for tha aged?)
Of course, this church doctrine will not in anyway hinder the secular athorities from doing their job if heinous crimes are committed 'coz that's a different story.
Thanks
So what's the point of the secret and surprise? Why not announce now? Secrecy warrants suspicion.
And I see nothing vicious or hurtful in reviewing the comments above and documented church statements and news articles and then concluding that (1) the INC isn't really Christian, since it denies the divinity of Jesus, and (2) it exerts a level of control over its members that is unacceptable by democratic and Christian standards. I am going to keep saying the same thing because you INC apologists keep offering the same dodges of the original point. Trying to make it sound like I'm mean and saying we all need to go to INC services doesn't change the facts outlined in the original post.
Well if name-calling pleases you keep it up. I'd prefer to be called a CULT than to be called a CHRISTIAN who celebrates unbiblical practices like Christmas, Holloween, Valentine's Day etc. & believing in characters like Easter Bunny & Santa Claus.
Thanks
Sigh.
1. The comment to which "Azriel" "responds" includes no name-calling.
2. Various holidays and mythical beings have nothing to do with the statements I've made.
3. I'm not a Christian.
4. Neither are INC members.
If I may suggest, can you also please make an article about the massive purchasing by the INC of the other denomination's houses of worship ( see this link start at around 3:50 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8jP0mVHxwPI). I wanna know/read what would be your reader's (negative) comments.
Here is the video of the planned structures that will be built at the Ciudad de Victoria I posted earlier ( see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7NbzbLbv1Ck&feature=related), you & your readers might want to discuss (or malign) it too. (Who knows, INC might also be planning to build the same structures in Scenic.)
Thanks
I tried visiting your other articles but none of them were as hot as this article which now has almost 300 comments. It just means that if religion is the topic, people in America are still interested unlike the Europeans who have fallen into too much secularism & political correctness.
Thanks
See this link http://wikimapia.org/#lat=14.744422&lon=121.1342561&z=18&l=0&m=b
which shows the INCs Victory Town, a housing program for members of the Church in the Philippines. Who knows, the same project will be constructed there in Scenic.
Hmmm... a special housing program for church members in a remote, isolated area owned exclusively by the church... maybe I do need to mention David Koresh.
"hot" topic: "Azriel," the number of comments only indicates the eagerness of church members to challenge negative commentary with their propaganda.
Azriel, you and your friends, in the course of this discussion, have already shown yourselves to be unreasonably aggressive and over defensive. There has only been one of you (Ray) who seems like he might make a good neighbor.
Any judgement South Dakotans may have about your community will be more than justified by the aggressive way your ambassadors have behaved on this thread.
Cory is our friend, regardless of the fact that he claims to be atheist while most South Dakotans are Christian, and regardless of the fact that he is a Democrat in a state that usually votes Republican.
Those things don't really matter.
What matters is the way we treat each other.
That is the test when it comes to being good neighbors.
And so far, it seems you and your fellows have failed the good neighbor test. You really do need to work on your people skills. If you are going to be accepted here.
You can't demand respect. You have to give it in order to receive it. That may not seem fair to you, but it's the way it is in these parts, friends.
Azriel, ikaw at ang iyong mga kaibigan, sa kurso ng talakayang ito, na ipinapakita sa inyong sarili na hindi makatwirang agresibo at higit sa pagtatanggol. May ay may lamang ay isa mo (Ray) na tila gusto maaaring siya ay gumawa ng isang mabuting kapit-bahay.
Anumang paghatol South Dakotans ay maaaring tungkol sa iyong komunidad ay higit sa Pantay ng agresibo paraan na ang iyong mga ambassadors behaved sa thread na ito.
Cory ay ang aming kaibigan, hindi alintana ng ang katunayan na siya ang sinasabing ateista habang ang karamihan sa mga South Dakotans ay Christian, at hindi alintana ng ang katunayan na siya ay isang makademokrasiya sa isang estado na karaniwang votes republikano.
Yaong mga bagay ay hindi talaga bagay.
Ano ang bagay ay ang paraan na namin tinatrato ang bawat isa.
Iyon ay ang pagsubok pagdating sa pagiging mabuting kapitbahay.
At ngayon, tila ang sa iyo at sa iyong mga fellows ay nabigo ang magandang pagsubok kapitbahay. Mo talagang kailangan upang gumana sa iyong mga kasanayan sa mga tao. Kung ikaw ay pagpunta sa tatanggapin dito.
Ikaw ay hindi maaaring demand ng paggalang. Kailangan mong bigyan ang mga ito upang makatanggap ng ito. Na maaaring hindi tila makatarungang sa iyo, ngunit ito ay ang paraan na ito ay sa mga bahagi, mga kaibigan.
Anyways, in case any of you here are curious what passage in the Bible are we using regarding conflicts within the Church, I just found it & here it is >>>
Matther 18:15-17 :
15 “If your brother or sister[b] sins,[c] go and point out their fault, just between the two of you. If they listen to you, you have won them over.
16 But if they will not listen, take one or two others along, so that ‘every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.’[d] 17 If they still refuse to listen, tell it to the church; and if they refuse to listen even to the church, treat them as you would a pagan or a tax collector.
So despite exerting all the efforts just to reconcile two brethren in conlict with each other but still one or both are still too thick-skulled to listen to reason / advise, then the hard-headed party is considered a PAGAN & is therefore excommunicated.
Thanks
Cory, I just ran my last note Filipino note through Google to see what it said in English, and darned if it doesn't make it look like I write kinda funny. It's pretty good for the most part though. Amazing, actually. ;^)
Yes, Azriel, as per my note above, it's a good way to get yourselves excommunicated (kicked out of the community) before you ever even get here. You should maybe follow your own advice. If you don't learn how to get along with your fellow South Dakotans, it is you who will become isolated, not them. Wake up and smell the coffee, Azriel.
@Fleming, my apologies to you & to your "kind" Atheist friend who is "not" very judgmental if my posting successively seems to imply that I'm too aggressive. Anyways, if our posts trying to at least clear some of the misconceptions about our Church (INC) offended you, please feel free to delete them. ^_^
Thanks
Indeed, Bill, my French students are also learning that Google Translate can do some funny things. We could play a fun form of Telephone: keep running a comment through the translation cycle. First translate your original into Tagalog, then run that translation back to English, then that English into Tagalog... I wonder how many iterations it would take to obtain complete gibberish... or Hamlet!
I'm getting tired of debating with Gargamel's cat, but wow! Is that really how you handle disputes? You go talk to someone with whom you disagree, then you bring a couple church folks with you to strongarm the guy in private, and then if he doesn't give in, you throw him out of the church and call him a pagan? You'd rather subject people to that sort of pressure than submit disputes to an impartial judicial system? And if someone doesn't listen to you, you tel them they're going to hell? Yikes.
I'm married to a Lutheran. I hang out with Christians all the time. They have disagreements all the time. When they have a dispute, they somehow manage to discuss, arbitrate, or even litigate many of their differences without excommunication.
Azriel, on the contrary, Cory has done us all a favor by collecting a sampling of your groups behavior for all to witness. They can draw their own conclusions based on what it is like to have a conversation with you in real time. And I gotta tell ya, for the most part, it ain't pretty.
In other words, Cory gave you a chance. You blew it, neighbor.
Too bad, too. I was doing my best to stick up for you. Not any more.
You're on your own, pal.
Bat tinutuligsa ang pagkakaisahan ng INC? Napakarami ng gusto gayahin ang kaisahan ngunit hindi sila nagtatagumpay, ngunit sa INC makikita mo kung paano magkaisa ang magkakapatid na parang iisa lamang na sya naman ang gusto ng Dios n magkaroon ng isang pag iisip at magkaroon ng isang hatol. Sinasabi nila unconstitutional daw yon, pano naging unsconstitutional eh bumubuto k naman. Sabi nga ni Cristo, ibigay mo kay Cesar ang kay Cesar at ang sa Dios ang sa Dios. Ang Cesar ay kumakatawan sa gobyero kaya ang bawat INC na nasa tamang edad n para bumuto ay bumubuto. Ngunit ang sa Dios ibigay din natin, ibig ng Dios may pagkakaisa sa INC, ayon sa biblia, Napakaganda sa magkakapatid na masayang nagkakaisa. Ayaw ng Dios ng nagkakawatak o nagkakabahagi-bahagi sapagkat yon ay sa demonyo. Anuman ang mangyari ang INC ay nagkakaisa sa lahat ng bagay at hindi lamang sa araw ng pagboto. At mananatili ang kaisahan na ito hanggang sa pagdating ni Jesu-Cristo.
At para naman kay Cory na inaadmit nya na siya ay Atheist na hindi naniniwala sa Dios. Sa Biblia mababasa na kamangmangan ang ganoong tao. Sana dumating ang panahon makilala mo ang Dios Ama na siyang lumalang ng lahat ng bagay at pagdating ng Araw ng paghuhukom ay may inilaan siyang Bayang Banal para sa mga anak nanindigan hanggang wakas. Salamat po.
[CAH: The gibberish continues. My points still stand unrefuted. INC is not Christian. INC exerts cult-like control over members.]