‘TRINITY’ IN THE BIBLE

The Holy Trinity

Those who deny the Divinity of Jesus are compelled to deny the Divine nature of the Holy Spirit. For them, “The Trinity of God” is beyond human understanding. So they deny it. They just forget the fact that God, who created man, can never be a slave of human intelligence. The Holy Spirit is considered only as an angel or one of the seven spirits. They, try to confuse “Trinity” as “Tri-theism” (Three-gods) and criticize Catholics as ‘Trinitarians.’ Did God reveal Himself  as ‘Trinity’ in the Bible? Why do we believe in this Great Mystery?

The term ‘Trinity’

As we all know, Divine Revelation is explained through the centuries by some theological terms. Although they are insufficient to explain the truth revealed in depth. We can never find the word ‘Bible’ in an authentic translation of the Bible. The word ‘Bible’ itself is a term that appeared in history in the 4th century. But we believe in it. Similarly, we don’t see the word ‘Trinity’ in the Bible. But to explain the Divine Mystery revealed to us about God the Father, the Son and The Holy Spirit, we use the term ‘Trinity.’

The word ‘Trinity’ is first used by St. Theophilus of Antioch in his book ‘Epistle to Antolycus’ in A.D. 180 (Greek: Triados). Remember, at that time there was no ‘Bible’ in the Church. In fact the term ‘Trinity’ is more ancient than the word ‘Bible’ itself. Before the formation of the Bible, those who worked behind the creation of a canonical book ‘Bible’ believed and accepted ‘The Trinity’ as God’s revealed truth handed over to them from the apostles. After some years, Tertullian (A.D. 160-250) used a Latin term for Trinity (Trinitas) in his work “Modesty.’ He wrote: “Trinity of the one Divinity; Father, Son and Holy Spirit” (chapter 22).

ETERNAL EXISTENCE OF HOLY TRINITY

Plurality of God in The Old Testament

In the Old Testament, God reveals Himself not as a single person, but ‘persons.’ In Hebrew, the word for God is not ‘El,’ singular noun, but plural ‘Elohim,’ which can never be translated as a single person ‘god’ as we usually do. Elohim is a plural noun with a singular form. It has a plural morphological form in Hebrew (Ref: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia). This plural word ‘Elohim’ occurs 2700 times in the Bible. Hebrews called God “Elohim,” which really meant ‘Divine Persons’ (Ref: Jerusalem Bible Footnote). There are evidences to prove this plural personality of God, in the Bible:

Genesis 1:26-Then God said: “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air…” Here, the ‘likeness of God’ is plural as He creates ‘Man’ as ‘male and female.’ Therefore, Adam and Eve shared one flesh, just as Father and Son shares one substance. Adam and Eve were one spirit, just like Father and Son shares one Spirit  (Malachi 2:15). Thus, the whole creation becomes the ‘image’ reflection, or mirroring of the manifold life of Divine nature of Trinity.

Genesis  3:22-Then the Lord God said, “Behold the man has become like one of Us, to know good and evil….”

Genesis 11:7-God said, “Come, let Us go down and confuse their language, that they may not understand one another’s speech…”

Isaiah 6:8-“I heard the voice of the Lord, ‘Whom shall I send? Who will go for Us?’” But only Jesus can call God the Father in singular form. So, he did it while he was dying on the cross. “El, El, lema sabachtani.”-Matthew 27:46

Anti-Trinitarians always quote Deu.6:4 to deny this mystery, which says: “Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is One Lord.” In fact, the biblical word here used for ‘One’ is “echad” which is a corporate oneness. Not a numeric count.

The Bible says to us that there are three that bear witness in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost (1Jn.5:7). The Bible reveals “God has a Son” Prov.30:4; “Who knows the name of God and the name of His Son!” The Bible also says the Holy Spirit exists with God; “Now the Lord has sent me and His Spirit.”

God is defined as Love in the Bible. If God is a single individual, this definition becomes invalid as He could never give and experience love. C.S. Lewis, the famous thinker says: “If God was a single person, then, before the world was made, he was not love.”

HOLY TRINITY IN THE NEW TESTAMENT

The Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father in union with Jesus. John 15:26-“But when the Comforter comes, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceeds from the Father, he shall testify me.” The Bible uses the Greek word ‘pneuma’ (pnyoo’-mah’) for Holy Spirit, which means ‘breath’ or ‘life-giving spirit.’ When God created man, He ‘breathed’ on Adam and gave him life. Jesus breathed on apostles and said, “Receive the Holy Spirit” (Jn.20:22). The Holy Spirit is the Breath of the Father and the Son, who is proceeding from both of them.

Jesus himself reveals the unity and equality of three persons of Trinity when he commanded: Matthew 28:19, “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.” Here, the ‘name’ singular is used for the plurality of “Father, Son and the Holy Spirit” (not the plural ‘names’). This singular ‘name’ implies the fundamental unity of Three Divine Persons. Those who deny the divine nature of Jesus and the Holy Spirit are baptizing their members “In the name of the Father,the God, Son the man, Holy Spirit an angel.” Through baptism, God, who is the Trinity, chooses us. 1 Pet. 1:2, “…who have been chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through the sanctifying work of the Spirit, for obedience to Jesus Christ.”

St. Paul explains this mystery more clearer when he says: “There are different  kinds of gifts, but the same Spirit, there are different kinds of service, but the same Lord, there are different kinds of working, but the same God works all of them in all men” (1 Cor. 12:4-6). The creative work of Heavenly Father, the redemptive work of the Son and sanctifying work of the Spirit are same work of the Almighty.

There is only one God; the Creator! He has only one son; Jesus Christ! He founded only one Church; upon Peter! Only the Catholic Church has divine origin!

ANSWER TO MY FRIEND LESTER ABOUT PRIMACY OF PETER- THE LAST PART

It’s been almost a week now since i started answering the allegations and baseless accusations of my friend Lester to the Holy Catholic Church.

Now, we will continue to answer his text messages. This is also the last part of the inquiries.

On the first picture we can see the sentence

“It wasn’t god it was God.”

Here, he is trying to correct my English- writing skill for not using a CAPITAL letter G in the word GOD. I am admitted to the fact that the word GOD is proper noun and should be written properly but I just want to remind my friend that we are in the text world that time and at the same time I need to reply faster than usual because I’m still inside the Church and lastly he still have many messages waiting for my response. However, I don’t think we differ a lot as far as English is concern. Why? Because in his sentence construction he used the linking verb” WAS” which is a PAST TENSE (of IS), If we will try to understand the sentence we will come up with the conclusion that “God is only God before and no longer God today”. Now is GOD only GOD before? Let’s read the Bible and see if LESTER is CORRECT.

In Revelation 22:13 we can read:

I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.

There, we can see that God is still God from the beginning until the end, so his sentence is not only GRAMMATICALLY wrong but BIBLICALLY as well.

In this message that he sent to me last April 14, He is denying the PRIMACY of St. PETER and  If we will try to analyze his claim, it seems that HE IS CERTAIN ABOUT IT. Now, is LESTER correct? Does Peter really was not able to reach ROME during His time? Let’s see if Lester can prove his claim beyond reasonable doubt.

Actually, it is indisputable Biblically, historically and archeologically that Peter was in Rome.

Let’s begin with the BIBLICAL PROOF that Peter was indeed in ROME.

We can read in 1 Peter 5:13 that Peter himself said that he was in “BABYLON”

"The Church in Babylon, chosen like yourselves by God, sends greetings, and so does Mark my son."(1 Peter 5:13)

In tagalong let’s start with verse 12; (1Peter 5:12-13)

12Sa pamamagitan ni Silvano, na tapat nating kapatid, ayon sa aking palagay sa kaniya, ay sinulatan ko kayo ng maiksi, na aking iniaaral at sinasaksihan na ito ang tunay na biyaya ng Dios: magsitibay kayo dito. 13Binabati kayo ng nasa Babilonia, na kasamang hinirang; at ni Marcos na aking anak. 14Mangagbatian kayo ng halik ng pagibig. Kapayapaan nawa ang sumainyong lahat na na kay Cristo.

In that particular verse Peter is sending it to various churches in Asia Minor suffering religious persecution.

From there we can easily understand that Peter was in Babylon that time, he is actually with Silvano (his secretary) who is the one writing what Peter wants to say to the various Church in Asia Minor.

Testimony and writings of the first Christians are unanimous that Peter was in Rome and was martyred there.

An archeological digging under St. Peter’s Basilica has produced the remains of the FIRST POPE right under the MAIN ALTAR of the church.

So, claims that Peter was not in Rome are baseless.

Now, the Question is “Where is Babylon?”

Historically, the “Babylon” in the Bible is none other than the ROME itself.

Numerous references attest to the earlier practice of using “Babylon” as a code for Rome.

Allow me to cite some of them.

“It is generally agreed that "Babylon" in 1 Peter 5:13 is a cipher for the city of Rome. The great city in Mesopotamia was no longer such in the first century. Diodorus of Sicily (56-36 BCE) writes: "As for the palaces and the other buildings, time has either entirely effaced them or left them in ruins; and in fact of Babylon itself but a small part is inhabited at this time, and most of the area within its walls is given over to agriculture." (2.9.9) Strabo, who died in 19 CE, writes: "The greater part of Babylon is so deserted that one would not hesitate to say . . . 'The Great City is a great desert'." (Geography 16.1.5) Also, no church other than Rome was claimed in ancient times to be the resting place of Peter. The Sibylline Oracles (5.143-168; 5.434), the Apocalypse of Baruch (10:1-3; 11:1; 67:7), 4 Ezra (3:1, 28, 31), and Revelation (14:8; 16:19; 17:5; 18:2-21) also refer to Rome as "Babylon." There was a reason for connecting the Babylonian and Roman empires, as Norman Perrin writes, "Rome is called Babylon because her forces, like those of Babylon at an earlier time, destroyed the temple and Jerusalem" (Jesus and the Language of the Kingdom, p. 58).”

Another one is “The History and Theology of the New Testament Writings, pp. 401-402”

“After 70 CE Babylon was used as a code name for Rome (cf. Rev. 14.8; 16.19; 17.5; 18.2, 20, 21), a clear signal for the initiated reader. In addition, the fact taht the Petrine-Pauline tradition was located in Rome (cf. 1 Clem. 5.4; IgnRom. 4.3) and the points of contact between 1 Peter and 1 Clement are other indications that the world capital was the point of origin for 1 Peter.

There is also an article written by a Baptist minister who supports the belief that the “Babylon” in 1Peter 5:13 is Rome. He provides objective and historical proof to that effect.

Understandably, this Baptist disputes that Peter was the first pope (what can we expect a person who opposes the papacy to do?). The important thing in his article is that—removing any bias—a non-Catholic, anti-pope minister cannot deny the fact that “Babylon” in 1Peter 5:13 refers to Rome.

You may read that article here:http://www.biblicalstudies.com/bstudy/miscstudies/peterrome.htm Was the Apostle Peter ever in Rome?

Other Biblical proofs that Rome is the Babylon were written in Holman Concise Bible Dictionary, Babylon, History and Religion Of. Page 59

Rev. 14:8, 16:19, 17:5; 18:2 and probably in 1 Peter 5:13 refers to Rome, the city which personified this idea for early Christians.

With these proofs above, we can therefore conclude that Lester is ignorant of the History of the Church and of the Apostles.  What he only has with him is the invented story by his Pastors in his new organization.

ARE CATHOLIC BORN AGAIN?

Many of our Fundamentalist friends and even our Protestant friends are saying that Catholics, "are not born again". They say that for a person to be born again, they must make an altar call, say the sinner's prayer and then they are saved. This is based from their track that I received when I was about to become a Baptist once:

THE ROMANS ROAD OF SALVATION:

1. Admit you are a sinner (Romans 3:23)
2. Believe in Jesus Christ to save you (Romans 5:8)
3. Accept Him as your Personal Savior (Romans 10:9)

But the question is, while our Protestant friends have a point here, they believe in Sola Scriptura. The question is, is there a "PERSONAL" Lord and Savior in the Bible? Where in the 73 books of the Bible does it say that Jesus is a "PERSONAL" Lord and Savior if ever? In the Bible, God is never a PERSONAL Savior, but the SAVIOR of men. Take a look at 1 Timothy 4:10, and here's what it says in the King James Version:

1 Timothy 4:10 (KJV), "For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe."

See? Jesus can never be a PERSONAL Savior, because it will imply that you are the only one that can be saved, but all who believe in Him. Now, speaking of a personal relationship with the Savior, we both do so in the Eucharist where we receive Jesus' body, blood, soul and divinity. Here's what it says in John 6:56

John 6:56 (KJV), "He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him."

See? Now that sounds like a personal relationship with the Savior, He will make His home with us if we eat His flesh and drink His blood. How come Protestants and Fundamentalists have an, "ALTAR CALL", when they have no altar? Just a pulpit and a stage?

BORN AGAIN THE BIBLE WAY:
Now, Fundametalists and Born Again movements like that of Billy Graham, Joyce Meyer, Joel Osteen and of course, Rick Warren will quote John 3:3, and here's what it says:

John 3:3 (KJV), "Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God."

Now, after they quote it, then they will say, "You must be born again by accepting Jesus as Lord and Savior". But is that really what our Lord meant? We will examine the Greek text of John 3:3 and see if it is really, "born again" that is written there. I'll be using the New Testament Greek Textus Rceptus 1550:

John 3:3, ἀπεκρίθη ὁ Ἰησοῦς καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ Ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω σοι ἐὰν μή τις γεννηθῇ ἄνωθεν οὐ δύναται ἰδεῖν τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ θεοῦ

In the Greek language, the KJV alone is not faithful to it. It doesn't use the word,"γεννηθῇ  ἀναγεννάω", or, "gennethe annagenao" which means, "born again", but rather, "γεννηθῇ ἄνωθεν" or, "gennethe anothen" which means, "born from above". Protestants and Fundametalists alone didn't consider the Greek text of John 3:3. What does our Lord meant when He said, "born from above"? Let's continue the read to v.4-5

John 3:4-5 (KJV), "Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born? Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God."
When our Lord says, "born from above", He didn't mean an altar call or saying the sinner's prayer, but rather, "born of water and the Spirit". If we want to know what our Lord is trying to imply, let's read how our Lord was baptized in Matthew 3:16-17 and here's what it says:

Matthew 3:16-17 (KJV), "And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him: And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased."

Jesus was baptized of water and the Spirit. Remember? Our Lord is talking about baptism. The water and the Spirit bear the same testimony as it is written in 1 John 5:8 of the King James Version:

1 John 5:8 (KJV), "And there are three that bear witness in earth, the spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one."

See? When a person is baptized, he receives three things: The Holy Spirit, the waters of baptism and the blood of Jesus. That's one interpretation of 1 John 5:8. Another interpretation is that it can also mean, baptism of blood, baptism of desire and baptism of water. Both interpretations are correct. That is why, for a person to be born again, he must be baptized as our Lord says in Mark 16:16

Mark 16:16 (KJV), "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned."

The conclusion is: YES, CATHOLICS ARE BORN AGAIN! THE BIBLE WAY!

So the next time you are asked if you are born again, say, "Yes, I am born again the Bible way by baptism as our Lord Jesus commanded (cf. John 3:5, Mark 16:16). Thank you for that question"

Article by Brother Jack Saliba

Original Article

ANSWER TO MY FRIEND LESTER ABOUT THE TWO CHERUBIM IN EXODUS 25:18-22

We will continue to answer all the accusations that my friend Lester is throwing to the Catholic Fold.

In most of my arguments about images, I used to quote Exodus 25:18-22 where God commanded Moses to make two cherubim of beaten gold. Here, Lester is trying to refute this passage asserting that when God ordered Moses to create the cherubim there is a special exception.

It’s really funny to cope up with his invented story of the writer is his text but I AM CERTAINLY SURE that there is no such thing as “WRITER ISSUE” in the verse where God commanded Moses to create the two Cherubim.

I just hope Lester cited any reference of this particular writer. However, not because he wasn’t able to explain further his argument doesn’t mean we will no longer explain our side.

What does the verse Exodus 25:18-22 really means? Is there really an exception when God commanded it? Does Lester has a point in interpreting this as “exception”? Let us see.

Let us first read the passage:

Exodus 25:18-22

“Make two cherubim of beaten gold for the two ends of the propitiatory, fastening them so that one cherub springs direct from each end. The cherubim shall have their wings spread out above, covering the propitiatory with them; they shall be turned toward each other, but with their faces looking toward the propitiatory. This propitiatory you shall then place on top of the ark. In the ark itself you are to put the commandments which I will give you. There I will meet you and there, from above the propitiatory, between the two cherubim on the ark of the commandments, I will tell you all the commands that I wish you to give the Israelites.”

(Note: original wordings are from Prof. Ramon Gitamondoc)

The fact that Lester mentions the Cherubim demonstrates that he is aware that not all images are prohibited in the Bible. The fact that the Old Testaments teaches that God commanded Moses to make the ark of the Covenant on top of which are the graven images of two cherubs has always been a difficulty on part of protestants whose theology includes the absolute prohibition of the making of graven images based on their erroneous interpretation of Exodus 20:3-5. The Catholic position has always been that what God proscribes in the aforementioned verse is idolatry which is the worship of false gods and of course related to that is bowing down to their man-made images. Another thing which makes pagan idol worship a world apart from Catholic use of sacred images is that the pagan believe that their images which are made of wood or stone have an inherent power, virtue of divinity in themselves (Isaiah 44:17) whereas the Catholic teaching is very clear that the images of Christ, of Mary, the angels and the saints do not have an ounce of divinity, power, or virtue in themselves. Lester can easily verify this in our Catechism and cannot continue to be ignorant of the Catholic teaching without culpability. If the Biblical passages such as Exodus 20:3-5, Deut 4:16-22, Isaiah 46:6-7 and similar other verses which we are all too familiar supports the protestant interpretation of an absolute prohibition then it would make God contradict himself for in many other parts of Scriptures he also commanded his people to make sacred images to symbolize his moral presence such as the ark of the covenant which has the images of two cherubs (Exodus 25:18-22; 1 Samuel 4:4; Hebrews 9:5) and also the images which adorn the temple which Solomon built (Ezequiel 41:18-19) and which God was pleased to accept (2 Chronicles 3:7-10). The similarity between the temple of God in the Old Testament and the Catholic churches is so striking if only one is willing to see and will once more demonstrates that Protestantism is not a revival of Biblical teachings but a break from Biblical teachings. Even if the images of the two Cherubs were the only images which God commanded his people to make it would still support the Catholic position that God did not absolutely forbid the making of graven images. If we consider further that this is not the only image which God commanded to be made but that God commanded his temple to be adorned with sacred images all over (Ezequiel 41:18-19) then this will make Lester’s objection untenable. If the devil can use bad images in order to tempt us to sin in our thoughts why cannot God also use sacred art in order to lift our minds and hearts to him?

[TAKE NOTE: The Ark of the Covenant was a different kind of religious 
symbol that the Israelites were used to. It was not a statue meant to 
represent the physical manifestation of a god. It was not a container 
for God—it was to be respected but not worshiped.]

Lester could not be closer to the Catholic position than this. It is true that the Ark of the Covenant was a unique religious symbol in that it was specifically commanded by God through Moses in its minute details and that it contained the manna and the tablets of the Law and the staff of Aaron all of which are holy relics for the Israelites. Even this one is very instructive for us. It shows that the Israelites venerated sacred relics which is sorely lacking within Protestantism like the BORN AGAIN. The Israelites did not have any misgivings in venerating the sacred objects which reminds them of God and his providence nor did they have any misgivings in bowing and praying before the Ark of the Covenant which has the graven image of the Cherubs (Joshua 7:6). Why should protestants be scandalized when they see a Catholic bowing and praying before the image of Jesus who became incarnate and appeared in human form (John 1:14)? It is true that there are some Catholics, and I believe there are only very few of them, who are uninstructed about the Catholic faith who believes that the images in our churches have inherent magical powers. But these are distortions and abuses on the Catholic teaching and practice concerning the proprietary use of images in sacred worship and an abuse is no valid argument the proper use. Just because there were some Israelites who also departed from the original intention of God in commanding Moses to make the graven image of the serpent (Numbers 21:5-9) and turn it into an object of idol worship (2 Kings 18:4) does not mean that God was wrong in his command nor that it did not accomplish its divine purpose (Wisdom 16:6-7). Catholics do not believe that sacred images are embodiments of god and we have been saying this several times but it seems that every time we say this it has fallen on the deaf ears of people like Lester who I feel has a deeply-rooted bias against the Catholic Church and can only make their position attractive by making a caricature of the Catholic belief and practice. I hope this message will echo loud and clear to Lester in order to awaken him to the truth which religious bias and prejudice has for long kept him in the dark.

With a full explanation above, I should hope Lester will not apply his religious bias here.

ANSWER TO A BAPTIST PASTOR OF CATHOLIC APOLOGIST JACK SALIBA

Patuloy po nating sasagutin ang mga PARATANG ng isang dating KATOLIKO na ngayon ay KASAPI na ng SAMAHANG BORN AGAIN na si LESTER PAJE.

PERO BAGO PO NATIN IPAGPATULOY ANG PAGSAGOT SA MGA TANONG NYA AY BIGYANG DAAN MUNA PO NATIN ANG ISANG DISCUSSION NG ISA NATING KAPATID NA SI JACK SALIBA. 

MAY KAUGNAYAN PO ANG MGA DISKUSYON NI BROTHER JACK AT NG ISANG BAPTIST PASTOR SA MGA TANONG NI LESTER PAJE KAYA PARA MAS MAINTINDIHAN PO NI LESTER ANG MGA ITINATANONG NYA AY NAIPASYA KONG IPOST DITO.

BAPTIST PASTOR: NGAYON AKO NAMAN PO ANG MAGTATANONG SO ANSWER IT DIRECTLY FROM THE BIBLE… Wag yung personal opinyon natin o ng simbahan natin…

Saan inutos ng Diyos o ni Kristo NA TAYO AY GUMAWA NG REBULTO NIYA, TAPOS PAGTIWALAAN NATIN, PUNASAN NG PANYO AT YUKURAN? ETC. SAAN? KUNG MERON PAKI SAGOT… KUNG WALA NAMAN MALIWANAG NA ITO AY GAWA GAWANG TURO NG TAO NA WALA SA BIBLIYA.

Jack Saliba: Pastor, tanong ko lang kung naiintindihan mo ba ang nakalagay sa Exodo 20:4-6? Hindi naman talaga pinagbabawal dyan ang paggawa per se e, ang pinagbabawal ay ang PAGSAMBA doon sa larawang inanyuan ng kamay. Ganon din sa Awit 115 na sigurado kong isisitas mo. E tignan nyo po itong mga litanya ng talatang magsasabing nag-utos ang Diyos:

Exodo 25:18-19, "At gawin mo ang isang querubin sa isang dulo, at ang isang querubin sa kabilang dulo: kaputol ng luklukan ng awa, gagawin mo ang mga querubin sa dalawang dulo niyaon. At ibubuka ng mga querubin ang kanilang pakpak na paitaas, na nilililiman ang luklukan ng awa, ng kanilang mga pakpak, na ang kanilang mukha ay nagkakaharap, sa dakong luklukan ng awa ihaharap ang mga mukha ng mga querubin."

Tignan nyo Pastor? Nag-utos ang Diyos kay Moises na gumawa ng larawan. Isa pa, yung sa Bilang 21:8-9, ganito po ang ating mababasa:

Bilang 21:8-9, "At sinabi ng Panginoon kay Moises, Gumawa ka ng isang mabagsik na ahas at ipatong mo sa isang tikin: at mangyayari, na bawa't taong makagat, ay mabubuhay pag tumingin doon. At si Moises ay gumawa ng isang ahas na tanso at ipinatong sa isang tikin: at nangyari, na pag may nakagat ng ahas ay nabubuhay pagtingin sa ahas na tanso,"

Baka banatan nyo, "E SA ISRAEL LANG INUTOS IYAN", kaso ang sagot ko dyan, e kahit ang Exodo 20:4-6 sa Israel lang din iyan inutos e. Ang punto lang dyan, nag-utos ang Diyos, hindi iyan object of worship, kundi remembrance lang iyon. Gaya ng Ten Commandments na di lang sa Israel, kundi sa mga Cristiano din. Ano ba ang diyus-diyosan ayon sa Biblia? Basahin natin ang 1 Corinto 8:4, ganito po ang nakalagay:

1 Corinto 8:4, "Tungkol nga sa pagkain ng mga bagay na inihain sa mga diosdiosan, nalalaman natin na ang diosdiosan ay walang kabuluhan sa sanglibutan, at walang Dios liban sa iisa. "

Kita mo Pastor? Iyan ang pinagbabawal sa Exodo 20:4-6, yung paggawa ng diyus-diyosan na walang kabuluhan sa sanlibutan o sa Ingles, "an idol stands for nothing in the world". Walang kwentang diyus-diyosan gaya nina Baal, Molech, Ra, etc. E yung kerubin, yung ahas na tanso, remembrance iyon ng ginawa ng Diyos.

BAPTIST PASTOR: LAHAT AY NAGKASALA AT HINDI NAKAABOT SA KALUALHATIAN NG DIYOS… Kaya nga namatay si Hesus dahil hindi mo kayang iligtas ang sarili mo kahit ano pang gawin mo… ang tinutukoy sa Bibliya na mga gawa ay yung bunga ng ikaw ay sumampalataya kay Hesus kaya mo ginagawa ang mabuti ito ay hindi dahil kailangan mong maligtas… since James is talking to believers already… to the Church that compose of believers… at ang tinutukoy dito is to practice faith by your works since ikaw ay niligtas na ni Kristo…

Jack Saliba: Si Paul, while emphasizing the Passion of Christ, he is also telling believers to repent AND PROVE BY THEIR WORKS THAT THEY HAVE REPENTED (Acts 26:20). Mismo si Paul nauna pa kay James when he stresses out the need for works for salvation. Yung mabuting gawa na iyon, kahit di ka nakarinig ng aral kay Jesus, nagagawa din iyon ng isang unbeliever. Basahin mo ito, yung sa Roma 2:14-15


Roma 2:14-15, "(Sapagka't kung ang mga Gentil na walang kautusan sa katutubo, ay nagsisigawa ng mga bagay ng kautusan, ang mga ito, na walang kautusan, ay siyang kautusan sa kanilang sarili; Na nangagtatanyag ng gawa ng kautusang nasusulat sa kanilang puso, na pinatotohanan ito pati ng kanilang budhi, at ang kanilang mga pagiisip ay nangagsusumbungan o nangagdadahilanan sa isa't isa);"

Dyan pa lang, pero gayunma'y kung namatay sila na di nakarinig ng aral ni Cristo, pwede pa rin sila maligtas.

Miski si San Pablo iginiit niya na ang tao ligtas sa pananampalataya at sa gawa. Kahit si James ganoon din.

BAPTIST PASTOR: “Is Jesus the only way to Heaven?”

Answer:”I’m basically a good person, so I’ll go to heaven.” “OK, so I do some bad things, but I do more good things, so I’ll go to heaven.” “God won’t send me to hell just because I don’t live by the Bible. Times have changed!” “Only really bad people like child molesters and murderers go to hell.”

Jack Saliba: Of course Jesus alone is the Way to heaven. Who is saying otherwise? The point only is that those, "who without fault have never heard of Christ", may also attain salvation if they follow His commands. Read Matthew 25:31-46. Jesus will not judge us according to our faith alone, but according to our faith and works. Jesus also said in Luke 6:46, "Why do you call Me, Lord, and do not obey the things I have taught you?" That should be a challenge to you Pastor, that, you, as a saved individual should prove it by your works. Those examples you see there only doesn't hold water because the Catholic Church doesn't teach that in the first place. One must believe (Hebrews 11:6), and at the same time, do works (Philippians 2:12).

BAPTIST PASTOR: [These are all common rationalizations, but the truth is that they are all lies. Satan, the ruler of the world, plants these thoughts in our heads. He, and anyone who follows his ways, is an enemy of God (1Peter5:8). Satan is a deceiver and often disguises himself as someone good (2 Corinthians 11:14), but he has control over all the minds that do not belong to God. "The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God" (2 Corinthians 4:4).]

Jack Saliba: Why? Does your example chronicled above attempts to prove the Catholic Church is teaching that one? No, no, no, its you pastor, who is being deceived by the god of this world. Why, you're even barking on the wrong tree. Our passages are supported by many passages above you like Philippians 2:12 and Luke 6:46.

BAPTIST PASTOR: [It is a lie to believe that God doesn't care about small sins or that hell is reserved for "bad people."]

Jack Saliba: Of course that is a lie that God doesn't care about small sins. Remember Revelation 21:27? "Nothing unclean will enter heaven". We teach that a person, though small are his sins, should be cleansed and purged first. Your theology of, "DUNGHILLS COVERED WITH SNOW", that gives a shallow meaning to the Passion of Christ. It even contradicts 1 Peter 4:1 which says, "Since Christ suffered physically, you should arm yourselves with the mind that He had, for WHOEVER SUFFERS PHYSICALLY IS NO LONGER INVOLVED WITH SIN". For you, the Passion of Christ only brings justification, but according to the Bible, it transforms a person from being a dunghill to a new creation in Christ in 2 Corinthians 5:17. The Passion of Christ, pastor, does not just bring justification, but also transformation, remember that, by the grace of God won on the Cross.

BAPTIST PASTOR: [All sin separates us from God, even a “little white lie.”]

Jack Saliba: Of course. Amen!

BAPTIST PASTOR: [Everyone has sinned, and no one is good enough to get to heaven on their own (Romans 3:23).]

Jack Saliba: Who said we can get to heaven on our own? We don't teach that. We teach the essentials of faith and grace (Romans 11:6, Hebrews 11:6), accompanied by good works (Philippians 2:12).

BAPTIST PASTOR: [Getting into heaven is not based on whether our good outweighs our bad; we will all lose out if that is the case. "And if by grace, then it is no longer by works; if it were, grace would no longer be grace" (Romans 11:6). We can do nothing good to earn our way to heaven (Titus 3:5).]

Jack Saliba: Of course we can't earn our way to heaven, we rely on the grace of God as your verses cited. But it also requires our cooperation in Romans 11:21-22. While it is true that grace is only a sole gift of God, it also requires our response with that grace working in us in Philippians 2:13.

BAPTIST PASTOR: ["Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it" (Matthew 7:13). Even if everyone else is living a life of sin in a culture where trusting in God is not popular, God will not excuse it. "As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient" (Ephesians 2:1-2).]

Jack Saliba: Pastor, we are teaching also that every sin is not excusable to God as written in Hebrews 4:13. Those verses you presented, suits the teaching of Eternal Security and faith alone more than the Catholic teaching on salvation and holiness. You are presenting, as Fr. Abe is saying, two different positions, or, as I call it, contradicting premises.

BAPTIST PASTOR: [When God created the world, it was perfect and good. Then he made Adam and Eve and gave them their own free will, so they would have a choice whether to follow and obey God. But they were tempted by Satan to disobey God, and they sinned. This separated them (and everyone that came after them, including us) from being able to have a close relationship with God. He is perfect and holy and must judge sin. As sinners, we couldn't reconcile ourselves to God on our own. So God made a way that we could be united with Him in heaven. "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life" (John 3:16). "For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord" (Romans 6:23). Jesus was born to die for our sins so that we would not have to. Three days after His death, He rose from the grave (Romans 4:25), proving Himself victorious over death. He bridged the gap between God and man so that we may have a personal relationship with Him if we only believe.]

Jack Saliba: It is true. That supports Catholic teaching. Very good approach to the salvation history of God in the Old and in the New Testament! Keep up the good work, pastor!

BAPTIST PASTOR: ["Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent" (John 17:3).]

Jack Saliba: Now, I know you won't use that the way Iglesia ni Cristo of Mr. Felix Manalo use it to deny the divinity of Christ. In fact, we know Jesus even before your church emerged. We even know Jesus in the Divine Mercy and in the Eucharist.

BAPTIST PASTOR: [Most people believe in God, even Satan does. But to receive salvation, we must turn to God, form a personal relationship, turn away from our sins, and follow Him. We must trust in Jesus with everything we have and everything we do. "This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference" (Romans 3:22). The Bible teaches that there is no other way to salvation than through Christ. Jesus says inJohn 14:6, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."]

Jack Saliba Pastor, you have just refuted faith alone there. You are 1 cm away from the Truth. I pray you are not like King Agrippa who is already on the way to salvation but did not grab the opportunity (Acts 26:28). And yes, we don't deny that salvation is found in Jesus Christ alone, but He didn't say John 3:16 alone. The Gospel is not just John 3:16, its the whole words of Jesus and that includes enduring to the end for salvation (Matthew 10:22).

BAPTIST PASTOR: [Jesus is the only way of salvation because He is the only One who can pay our sin penalty (Romans 6:23). No other religion teaches the depth or seriousness of sin and its consequences. No other religion offers the infinite payment of sin that only Jesus Christ could provide. No other “religious founder” was God become man (John 1:1,14) – the only way an infinite debt could be paid. Jesus had to be God so that He could pay our debt. Jesus had to be man so He could die. Salvation is available only through faith in Jesus Christ! “Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:12).]

Jack Saliba: Of course no other religion or any religious founder can pay for our sin, its only Jesus and always will be since He is God. That is why your church, among the 33,000+++++ denominations is founded by men, and never by God. Ours however is founded by God who became man in the Person of Jesus of Nazareth. That is why we are united in Him and in His word. I pray you will come home to the Catholic Church, dear Pastor and know Christ as Lord and Savior in the Eucharist. God bless you!! To close this up, let me cite a Biblical passage from Acts 5:38-39:

Acts 5:38-39 (KJV), "And now I say unto you, Refrain from these men, and let them alone: for if this counsel or this work be of men, it will come to nought: But if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it; lest haply ye be found even to fight against God."

Pray over this passage and read it SLOWLY. Also, try to read also our Lord's statement in Matthew 12:30 SLOWLY:

Matthew 12:30 (KJV), "He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad."

God bless you! May the King of Mercy guide you to His Church!!

Another Answer is available in The Splendor of the Church website created by non other than Fr. Abe Arganiosa

Part1

Part2

ANSWER TO MY FRIEND LESTER ABOUT IMAGES On THE CATHOLIC CHURCH

 

                                                                       

The verses he cited on this inquiry are the common verses that ANTI-CATHOLICS are using to accuse the CATHOLICS of “IDOL WORSHIPPER”. Let us examine his claims:

Habakkuk 2:19

¹⁹ Alas for you who say to the wood, “Wake up!”
    to silent stone, “Rouse yourself!”
    Can it teach?
See, it is gold and silver plated,
    and there is no breath in it at all.

        Habakkuk 2:19 (Hebrew-English Bible)

"Woe to him wo says to the wood, Awake! To the dumb stone, Arise! Can it teach? Behold, it is overlaid with gold and silver, and there is no breath at all in it."

Tignan mo Lester ang pagkakaiba ng talatang ginamit mo sa original na salin ng Habakkuk 2:19?

Ang Tanong, sino ba ang nagsasabi nyan sa kahoy? Baka kayo lang na mga dating katolikong hindi nag-aral bago lumipat ng born again?

Mga gago lang at ulol ang gumagawa nyan sabi ng JEREMIAS 10:8.

Acts 17:29

²⁹ Since we are God’s offspring, we ought not to think that the deity is like gold, or silver, or stone, an image formed by the art and imagination of mortals.


Ang tanong Lester, May "image" nga bang nakasulat sa greek sa Acts 17:29?

Ang image sa greek ay "eikón" at walang "eikon" na mababasa sa orihinal na salin, sa halip ito ang nakasulat sa greek, "chrusO E arguro e Litho Charagmati technEs"

Na ang ibig sabihin ay "like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art".

Sa Greek ang nakasulat ay, "gos oun huprchontes tou theou out opheilomen nomizein chrusO E arguro e Litho Charagmati technEs kai enthuMeseOs anthropou to theion einai"
humoion

Ito ang isinalin mula sa greek,"Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of GOD, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device."(Greek-English)

KITA MO DINAGDAGAN MO ANG TOTOONG NAKASULAT AT GUMAMIT KA NG  TRANSLATION NA MALI!

Romans 1:25

²⁵ because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen.
Isaiah 42:8

⁸ I am the Lord, that is my name;
    my glory I give to no other,
    nor my praise to idols.

Mali na naman ang pagkagamit mo ng mga talatang ito, DEFINITELY ganun SIGURO ang ginagawa mo sa mga images noonng Katoliko ka pa, kaya akala mo lahat na ng mga katoliko ay kagaya mo.

Ngayon ano ba ang tinutukoy na images sa mga verses na BINANGIT mo? BASAHIN natin ang BIBILIYA at HAYAAN nating sya MISMO ang mag define nd SALITANG IYAN.

MABABASA natin sa 1 Corinthians 8:4-6 (NIV)

⁴ So then, about eating food sacrificed to idols: We know that “An idol is nothing at all in the world” and that “There is no God but one.” ⁵ For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as indeed there are many “gods” and many “lords”), ⁶ yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.

Iyon naman pala. . . ang idol pala ay IN-EXISTING, and PROBLEMA lang sa PAGKAUNAWA MO LESTER AY INIISIP MO NA ANG MGA LARAWAN SA SIMBAHAN AY DIYOS MISMO AS IF WE DON'T RECOGNIZE GOD THE FATHER SON AND THE HOLY SPIRIT WHOM the IMAGES are actually REPRESENTING. This is very far from your UNDERSTANDING that we WORSHIP the IMAGES ITSELF and NOT GOD.

NOW I ONLY HAVE ONE QUESTION TO YOU LESTER AND GOES LIKE THIS:


DOON BA SA Acts 17:29, sa original na nakasulat sa greek ay meron bang nakasulat na greek word na "eikón" kagaya ng ginamit at pinaniniwalaan mong salin?


[Acts 17:29 Since we are God’s offspring, we ought not to think that the deity is like gold, or silver, or stone, an image formed by the art and imagination of mortals.]

KUNG WALA AKONG MABASA NAKASULAT NA "IMAGE" OR "EIKÓN" TATANGGAPIN MONG MANLOLOKO AT SINUNGALING ANG LAHAT NG MGA BORN AGAIN?

Now are you STRONG ENOUGH to FACE the CHALLENGE? In your case, I doubt it. 

I am so amazed when he forgot to mention the most favorite and common verse that the anti-Catholics are using, the Exodus 20:4-5, but since he did not mention it, I already did the honor to include it. Again, this issue that he is throwing to the Catholic Fold has already been answered long long time ago. It’s just that my friend is not aware of that fact. But for the benefits of his research let us tackle it. As I said this has already been answered and I will just copy paste the answer here of my idol and fellow Apologist Professor Ramon Gitamondok . Original Article

Exodus 20:4-5

⁴ You shall not make for yourself an idol, whether in the form of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. ⁵ You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I theLord your God am a jealous God, punishing children for the iniquity of parents, to the third and the fourth generation of those who reject me,

“One of the common objections we encounter from our non-Catholic friends is on the use of images in worship. They will say that Catholics in using images in their religious worship is guilty of violating the first commandment of the Decalogue (Exodus 20:4-6).In this article, it is my intention to enlighten our protestant brothers on this Catholic belief and practice in the hope that by clarifying certain misconceptions we will be able to draw closer to each other into the unity of faith in which our Lord Jesus himself so earnestly desire (John 17:11).

The biblical verses commonly cited against the Catholic use of images such as Isaiah 42:8; 40:18-20, Deuteronomy 4:15-18, and Exodus 20:4-6 condemns idolatry which is the worship of images as gods or in place of God. This practice which was common among the pagans and in certain occasions was also committed by the Israelites is what God prohibits. Together with our Protestant brothers the Catholic Church also condemns idolatry as a grievous sin against the first commandment. In response to the protestant reformation which denies the use of images in worship the Catholic Church sets down clearly her teaching on this matter in the Council of Trent:

“The images of Christ and of his Virgin Mother and of the other Saints are to be had and retained especially in churches, and a due and honor and veneration is to be given them NOT BECAUSE any virtue or divinity is believed to be in them that for which they are to honored as what the heathens do who placed their hopes in idols BUT BECAUSE the honor which is given them is referred to the originals which they represent..”

Therefore, the Catholic Church does not teach and Catholics do not believe that images have any power, virtue or an ounce of divinity and it is not the image, per se, which is the object of our veneration but the originals which they represent.

Although the Bible condemns idolatry (worship of images as gods) it however permits and even commands the proper use of images in worship. For example in Exodus 25:18-22 God commands Moses: “Make two cherubim of beaten gold for the two ends of the propitiatory, fastening them so that one cherub springs direct from each end. The cherubim shall have their wings spread out above, covering the propitiatory with them; they shall be turned toward each other, but with their faces looking toward the propitiatory. This propitiatory you shall then place on top of the ark. In the ark itself you are to put the commandments which I will give you. There I will meet you and there, from above the propitiatory, between the two cherubim on the ark of the commandments, I will tell you all the commands that I wish you to give the Israelites.”

The temple which King Solomon built and dedicated to God was adorned with sacred images as we can read in Ezequiel 41:17-19. “As high as the lintel of the door, even into the interior part of the temple as well as outside, on every wall on every side in both the inner and outer rooms were carved the figures of cherubim and palm trees: a palm tree between every two cherubim. Each cherub had two faces: a man’s face looking at a palm tree on one side, and a lion’s face looking at a palm tree on the other; thus they were figured on every side throughout the whole temple.”

After the Temple was built God was pleased and sanctified the place of worship for his people as we can read in 2 Chronicles 7:12-16: “The LORD appeared to Solomon during the night and said to him: “I have heard your prayer, and I have chosen this place for my house of sacrifice. If I close heaven so that there is no rain, if I command the locust to devour the land, if I send pestilence among my people, and if my people, upon whom my name has been pronounced, humble themselves and pray, and seek my presence and turn from their evil ways, I will hear them from heaven and pardon their sins and revive their land. Now my eyes shall be open and my ears attentive to the prayer of this place. And now I have chosen and consecrated this house that my name may be there forever; my eyes and my heart also shall be there always.”

Gathering these facts from Scriptures, we can safely conclude that God does not absolutely forbid the use of images in religious worship otherwise God would contradict himself by prohibiting in one part of the Bible what he explicitly commands in another part. Catholics DO NOT worship sacred images for we DO NOT believe that they possess any power in themselves. If despite this some people will still continue to ascribe to us beliefs and practices which we also condemn and abhor then they should also remember another commandment of the Decalogue: “Thou shall not bear false witness against thy neighbor.”

For more readings and Religious Discussion about the images and the like. Please Click Here

http://www.splendorofthechurch.com.ph/