Thursday, February 14, 2008
Monday, February 11, 2008
Ang Paratang ni I.N.C. Minister Ramil Parba kay Bro. Wendell na nandaya raw sa Debate. (See the Video)
Saturday, February 9, 2008
Thursday, January 17, 2008
Sunday, January 13, 2008
PETER AS THE FIRST POPE
St. Peter is clearly deficted as the first among the apostles, both by Jesus and by the evangelist. St. Peter is mentioned 191 times in the New Testament. All the other apostles combined are mention by name just 130 times. And the most commonly referenced apostle apart from St. Peter is St. John, whose name appears 48 times. St. Peter's authority is unquestioned, even by St. Paul. And Peter's name appears first in virtually every listing of the apostles, just as Judas' name always appears last. If theres is a reason for a latter - which there obviously is - on what basis can we deny there is a reason for the former?
Mat. 16:15-19 - "Blessed are you, Simon, son of Jonah...you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of thenetherworld shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven; and whatever you loosed on earth shall be loosed in heaven."
Some Protestant apologistsd make much of the fact the two words for "rock" in the original Greek text, Petros and Petra , have different gender endings. They claim that the gender ending results in different meanings - usually, in the size of the "rock" in question. But the different geneder endings are simply due to the fact that a man's name cannot have a feminine ending, while the Greek word for "rock" does. The error in the Protestant position becomes abundantly clear when one realizes that in the Aramaic language, which Jesus spoke, there were no gender endings for nouns. So when Jesus spoke this sentence, he would have been saying, "...you are rock, and upon this rock I will build my Church..." There would have been difference whatsoever in the endings of the words; it would have been the exact same word used twice. This is just one example of Protestatnt believers reading the scripture through the lens of their traditions, and missing the clear and obvious sense of certain key passages. The fact is, these are profoundly important verses, for they contain Jesus' unequivocal promise to protect and guide the Church he is to found, throug St. Peter, to whom he entrusts the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whenever God renames someone, he is calling our attention to a truly momentous event - as in Abram to Abraham, Jacob to Israerl, Saul to Paul and Simon to Rock.
Is. 22:15-25 -"Eliakim is given the keys of the kingdom, thus becoming the most powerful man in the realm apart from the king himself. The keys are the sign of the royal authority. Because the keys are passed on to each successive officeholder, they indicate that the office lives on even after the individual who hold it dies. The king does not stop appointing stewards when one dies - the keys are passed along to another. Thus Jesus' royal authority did not die with St. Peter but was passed on to the next generation, as it will be until the end of time.
Accorsing to St. Paul, St. Peter was singled out by Jesus after the resurrection.
1 Cor. 15:3-5 - "For I handed on to you as of first importance what I also recieved: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures; that he was burried; that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures; that he appeared to Cephas (St. Peter), then to the Twelve."
Note too that St. Paul refers to St. Peter by the name Jesus gave him: Cephas, which is, "Rock." This reference by St. Paul is alone enough to refute the alternative intertive interpretations given for Mt. 16:15-19.
For example, if the word "Rock" referred not to Peter, but to Peter's faith, then St. Paul would making a terrible blumder in referring to Simon himself as "Rock." No, in the passage from Matthew, Jesus himself was clearly giving Simon a new name, "Rock," indicating a change in his status that was to have a momentous impact on salvation history.
The keys belong to Jesus, in the scripture, they are the sign of his authority. When he gives the keys to St. Peter in Mattew 16, he is simply delegating the authority, which is his for all eternity, thus, as Eliakim before him (see Is. 22:15-25), St. Peter is chief steward of the kingdom who wields the king’s authority.
After St. Paul receives his revelations from the Holy Spirit, he travels to Jerusalem specifically to confer with St. Peter.
Gal. 1:18 – “Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to confer with Cephas…” This is an awesome indication of the position of the authority, which St. Peter occupied. Also note that once again Paul refers to Peter by the name Jesus gave him – Cephas, or “Rock.”
Abraham was the patriarch of the old covenant, and his name was changed by God to underscore his status. Abraham was also,, in the passage quoted here, the only man reffered to as “rock” until Jesus reffered to St. Peter that way. Elsewhere, that metaphor was reserved for God (Deut. 32:4; 1 Sam. 2:2; Ps. 18:3, etc.). So not only reffering to Simon as “Rock” but also by changing his name in the process, Jesus is establishing an undeniable parallel between Simon Peter and Abraham. Peter is the patriarch of the new covenant, just as Abraham was the patriarch of the old.
Acts 2:14:36 – “Then Peter stood up with the eleven, raised his voice, and proclaimed…” This is the first Christian sermon detailed in scripture. Already St. Peter’s status as leader is clear, as shown by the title, “the Eleven,” which never included Peter.
Jesus prays for St. Peter alone among the apostle.
Lk. 22:31-32 – “ Simon, Simon, behold Satan has demanded to sift all of you like wheat, but I have prayed that your own faith may not fail; and once you have turned back, you must strengthen your brothers.” Peter receives special attention from Jesus. Jesus observes that Satan is seeking to break the apostles’ faith. Jesus response is to pray for Peter and direct him to hold the rest of the apostles firm. Jesus’ statement devotails perfectly with Peter’s role as the “Rock” upon which the Church rests, and the pope’s role in Church history.
Three times Jess asks St. Peter:
Jn. 21:15-17 –“ Do you love me?...” and three times he commands Peter to “feed my lambs” and “tend my sheep.” Note that Jesus makes no such request of any other apostle. St. Peter is supplied with supernatural means to accomplish the task Jesus gives him.
Mat. 17:24-27 –“…go to the sea, drop in a hook, and take the first fish that comes up. Open his mouth and you will find a coin worth twice the temple tax. Give that to them for me and for you.” Peter, in paying the tax for Jesus, acts as the Lord’s proxy in this earthly matter.
St. Peter initiates and then supervises the choice of Judas’ successor.
Acts 1:15-26 – “During those days Peter stood up in the midst of the brothers…”
Jesus acknowledges the authority of the Pharisees when they speak from the Chair of Moses.
Mat. 23:1-3 – “…Jesus spoke to the crowds and to his disciples, saying, ‘The scribes and the Pharisees have taken their seat on the chair of Moses. Therefore, do and observe all things whatsoever they tell you, but do not follow their example.’” Incidentally, the phrase, “the chair of Moses,” is not found anywhere in the Old Testament. The fact that the Lord refers to it here confirms the fact that Jesus acknowledged the authority of tradition.
Out of 265 Pope, 79 were saints, only 10 were immoral or corrupt, and not one ever taught error in areas of faith and morals. That’s a failure rate of less than 4 percent. By way of comparison, of the apostles picked by Jesus, one out of the original twelve was evil – representing a failure rate of 8 percent. So the supposed evil and corruption of the popes of history is hardly a reason to despair of the institution of the papacy. Indeed, we would suggest that the extremely low number of evil popes suggest Holy Spirit is guiding their selection and providing them support.
Saturday, January 12, 2008
ORDINATION AND PRIESTHOOD
Priests do not come between Jesus and us. They are in Jesus, and of Jesus, and with Jesus. Thes priestly fuction actually dates back through the New Testament, to the earliest Old Testament times, with Melchizedek who offered sacrifice on behalf of Abraham. As St. Cyprian of Carthage wrote around the year 250 A.D.: "If Christ Jesus, our Lord and God, is Himself the High Priest of God the Father; and if He oofered Himself as a sacrifiec to the Father; and if He commanded the this be done in commemoration of Himself - then certainly the priest, who imitates that which Christ did, truly functions in place of Christ." (The Faith of The Early Fathers, Vol. 1, William A. Jurgens, pp. 232-233)Deut. 34:18 - "Now Joshua, son of Nun, was filled with the spirit of wisdom, since Moses had laid his hands upon him; and so the Istraelites gave him their obedience, thus carrying out the Lord's command to Moses." The wisdom and the authority of the Holy Spirit are imparted through the laying on of hands by those already in authority. This is still the case today, as we see in the Sacrament of the Holy Orders, which is conducted by a bishop, acting under the authority given to the apostles by Jesus himself.
Gen. 14:18 - "Melchizedek, king od Salem, brought out bread amd wine, and being a priest of God Most High, he blessed Abram..." Why did Abraham need to be blesses by a man, when he was chosen by God to be the father of nations? In scripture, no one takes mantle of spiritual authority upon himself. Even Moses, after being chosen by God, reports to "all the elders of the Israelites" to convince them of his call (Ex.4:29-31). Likewise, Jesus himself is dedicated in the temple and baptized in the Jordan. In submitting to such sacramental rituals himself, Jesus is showing us that no one outside of the divinely ordainde spiritual authority of the Church.
Heb. 7:1-28 - " You are priest forever according the order of Melchizedek..." Jesus has become the guaranettee of an (even) better covenant...he, because he remains forever, has a priesthood that does not pass away."
Refers to Ps. 110:4 - "Like Melchizedek you are a priest forever..." The priesthood of the Lord is on going and eternal. And since priesthood of individual men is based on thew priesthood of Jesus, we know it is ongoing and eternal also.
At Pentecost, Jesus ordainde the apostles and commissioned them to go out and minister to world.
Jn. 20:19-23 - "As the Father has sent me, so I send you,' And when he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, 'Received the Holy Spirit. Whose sins you forgive are forgiven them, and whose sins you retained are retained.'" The fact that he sent them as the Father had sent him shows that he intends them to function as he did - as priest. It is no coincidence that it is here he also give them the priestly power to forgive sins.
Acts 8:9-25 - When Simon the Magician wishe to recieve the power of the Holy Spirit, he did not simply declare himself a minister and begin to preach. Instead, he approached St. Peter with his proposition. Even this sinner knew that he could not ordain or anoint himself.
1 Tim. 5:17 - "Presbyters who preside well deserve double honor, especially those who toil in preaching and teaching... Do not lay hands too readily on anyone..."
Heb. 6:2 - "...laying on of hands..."
Mal. 2:7 - "...The lips of the priest are to keep knowledge, and instruction is to be sought from his mouth, because he is the messenger of the Lord of hosts."
Phil. 1:1 (KJV) -"Paul and Timotheus, the servants of Jesus Christ, to all saints in Christ Jesus which are at Philippi, with the bishops and deacons."
The Church hierarchy existed from the first Christian generation. All the faitfull are "a royal priesthood, a holy nation"(1 Pet. 2:9), because we offer all we have and all we do to the service of the Lord. And we pray that our personal sacrifice is acceptable to him. But that does not mean we are authorized as individuals to offer Mass on behalf of the community. That privilege is se-aside for men to whom the Holy Spirit has been imparted through the laying on of hands. It is no accident that we see no one in the early Church taking such authority upon themselves. In apostolic times, the authority to teach and preach was always imparted through the laying on of hands by the apostles.
APOSTOLIC SUCCESSION
The Bishops of the Catholic Church can trace their ordinations back to the apostles themselves. This laying on of hands in the sacrament of the Holy Orders take place as part of an uninterrupted chain connecting us to Christ himself two thousand years ago. In every sense, today's bishops are the successors of Peter, Andrew, James, Philip, Bartholomew, Mathew, James, Thaddaeus, Simon the Zealot and even-in very rare and unfortunate intances to Judas Iscariot.
Acts 6:6 -"They presented these men to the apostles who prayed and laid hands on them." The Church's authority is thus passed from generation to generation.
Eph. 2:19-20 - "household of God, builth upon the foundation of the apostles and the prophets..." The Church's authority is not based on human wisdom or insight, or even on the Bibles, but on the authority of God passed to and through the apostles.
St. Paul and St. Barnabas ordain others. No one ordains himself, nor does anyone presume to act as presbyters without firts being ordained
Acts 14:23 -"They appointed presbyters for them in each church..."
2 Tim.1:6 - "I remind you to stir into flame the gift of God that you have through the imposition of my hands."
The laying on of hands is the vehicle whereupon the Holy Spirit - the "flame" - is imparted. This is an utterly sacramental view of the infusion of the life of the Holy Spirit, and of the passing on of apostolic authority. Paul here gove us an excellent insight into te workings of Sacred Tradition - the teachings of the apostles that are passed along, through the authority of the Church - from one generation to the next.
2Tim.3:14 - "...Remain faithful to what you learned and believed, because you know from whom you learned it..." Authority is derived from apostolic succession - not from an appeal to "scripture alone." The Bible is quite clear ont this. Likewise, in Mt. 16:19, Jesus gives St. Peter the keys to the kingdom of heaven. It is in this authority that Peter's power to bind and to loose in heaven as well as on earth - is founded.
Heb. 13:7 - "Remember your leaders who spoke the word of God to you. Consider the outcome of their way of life and imitate their faith." Again, the hierarchy is upheld. The truth of scritural interpretation does not come from men, but from the Holy Spirit, through the apostles and their successors. We are not free to arrive at our own interpretations of the scriptures, apart from the apostles and the Church Jesus founded upon them. Indeed, the authority of the scriptures is derived from the apostles which is to says, the Church - and not vice versa.
Wednesday, December 12, 2007
THE CROSS IN THE GOSPEL AND IN THE KORAN
In chpter one of his first letter to the Corinthians, verses 22 to 24, Paul, the apostle, said: "For the Jews demand signs, and Greeks seek wisdom, but we prech Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews, and folly to Gentiles, but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and wisdom of God." If we consider the words of the apostles generally we see that the Gospel which they preached from the dawn of Christianity and which people recieved nd accpeted by which they were saved, was the joyful news which Paul summarized in these words in 1 Cor. 15:1-4. Even so, with the passing of some five hundred years after Paul nd the spreading of the Gospel in all the world, there were those who objected to this truth s to the saying to the Christians, "You are mistaken in your religion." Maybe these objectors took their ideas from heretics-Jews converted to Christianity, whose fathers were neighbours to those who believed tht Christ would (did) not die. We are very indebted to John, one of the writers of the Gospel, who mentions, this matter when he recorded for us the saying of the Pharisees in their dispute with Christ, in John 12:34 states: "We heared from the Law that the Christ remains forever. How can you say that the Son of Mn must be lifted up? Who is this Son of Man?'" According to Iskander Jadeed in his book intitled "THE CROSS", page 10, that this heresy was widespread among the Christians of the rabian Peninsula, saying that Christ was able to transform from one image (form) to another, and when His enemies came to arrest Him He cast His likeness on to another man, who was crucified insted of Him, but Christ was lifted up to the One who sent Him, scorning His enemies.
Now my friend remember that the passage in the QURAN about the last dys of Christ is in greement with this story and opposed to the Jewish version. It says, Surat an Nisa 157-158, "Their saying, (that is the Jews) 'We slew the Messiah, Jesus the Son of Mry, Allah's Messenger', they slew Him not, nor crufified Him, but it appeared so unto them, and lo! Those who disagree concerning it, are in doubt therefore, they have no knowledge thereof, save pursuit of a conjecture, they slew Mhim not for certain, but llah took Him up to Himself."
Now my friend remember that the passage in the QURAN about the last dys of Christ is in greement with this story and opposed to the Jewish version. It says, Surat an Nisa 157-158, "Their saying, (that is the Jews) 'We slew the Messiah, Jesus the Son of Mry, Allah's Messenger', they slew Him not, nor crufified Him, but it appeared so unto them, and lo! Those who disagree concerning it, are in doubt therefore, they have no knowledge thereof, save pursuit of a conjecture, they slew Mhim not for certain, but llah took Him up to Himself."
Clearly we understand from the version of the heretics who clung to Christianity, that the Cross, in their estimtion, was not n historical event, or a doctrine of redemtion, but a symbol or a sign, as the str which guided the Magi to the cradle of the Child in Bethlehem, or as the apperance of dove in which the Holy Spirit appeared, coming to Christ at His bptism in Jordan. But the hevy cross on which Christ was hanged, which is the altr of redemtion, where the Lamp of God was sacrified to take away the sin of the world, was of no importance to them! They rejected the truth which Paul proclaimed to the nations in Galatians 3:13-14, "Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law, having become a curse for us;for it is written 'Cursed be everyone who hangs on tree, that Christ Jesus the blessing of Abrham might received the promise of the Spirit through faith'" (to be continued)
Sunday, December 9, 2007
Catholic Doctrinal Exposition/Religious Debete between Catholic and Islam
A public debate held at Ozamiz City Public Market, last December 9, 2007, was challenged by Muslim preacher Muhammad Ali. The proposition was: Resolved, That Islam Religion can only be saved according to the Quran, Bible and Standard References. The Muslim Preacher Muhammad Ali defended the affirmtive side while Bro. Wendell Talibong, CFD National Vice President for external Affairs took the negative side. The Debate was aired in Dxdd AM.
In his introductory and first affirmative speech, Muslim preacher Muhammad Ali emphasized that only the Islam Religion can be saved. To prove his side from the Quran he cited Su.ah Al-Ma'idah 5:3; Surah Aal'mraam 3:67, and to prove from the Bible he quoted Matt.7:21.
During the Cross-examination, Muhammad Ali was confounded when confronted with a barraged of questions from Bro Wendell using the two versions of their Quran, and with their own Islamic books.
Brother Wendell's rhetoric cross-examiniation to Muhammad Ali drew a big applause from the audience when he cited the Quran 2:62, states that the Christians who believed in God and did righteousness will have their reward with their Lord.
In the latter part of the debate, the Muslim preacher had the difficulty in answering the contradictions of thier Quran and books. He accepted that he was not prepared for the public debate although he challenged the Catholic Faith Defenders.
When Muhammad Ali cross-examined the negative side, the answers of Brother Wendell to the questions of Muhammad Ali were so enlightening as cited by the Quran 2:62 and Quran 5:82.
At this juncture, the moderator, Bro. Adam Amper instructed Muhammad Ali to ask more questions since he still had 5 minutes more to the alloted 15 minutes cross-examintion. But Muhammad Ali said the he had no more questions.
Friday, December 7, 2007
Can Faith Alone Save You?
Many good people have been taught from childhood that they need only a strong faith in Jesus Christ as their Redeemer to be saved. By this they mean that obedience to God's Laws, the practice of virtue, good works, hve no effective part to play in the saving of one's soul. Here are the reasons why this is illogical:
1. Faith in Christ is incomplete and superstations if it does not mean faith in veerything Christ was and said and did. He presented Himself to the world as a Redeemer, indeed, but also as a teacher nd lawgiver. His constant stressing of the importance of obedience to God can only mean that it is necessary for a man's savaation, just s is belief in the merits of His passion and death.
2. Faith in Christ as a Redeemercaannot save a man who neglects to heed these specefic warnings He gave: "If thou wouldst enter into life, keep the commaandments."(Matt. 19:17 "Not every man that saith to me, Lord, Lord, shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he that doth the will of my Father who is in heaven."(Matt. 7:21)
3. Fith in Christ as a Redeemer should not blind one to the great effort He mde to show the world the evil nd the punishments of sin,and to inspire men to repent of and renounce sin. His pssion and death, while they paid a debt that men could not hve paid, were at the same time a dramtic appeal for sorrow for sin and reformtion of life as necessaary for salvtion.
4. The doctrine of faith alone as the means of salvation has led inevitably to the minimizing of the importnce of some of Christ's most severely promulgated laws. It has led many to deny His sttement that divorce nd remaarige are the same as adultery; it has induced maany to renounce obedience tospiritual authority, which He inculcated so clearly; it has mde it easy for men to defend their avarice and social injustice.
5. If faith alone were necessary for salvation, there would be no point in a general judgement at the end of the world, which Christ described as an event in which "every man will be judged according to his works." If good works are not necessary to salvation, why should any man be judge ccording to thier deeds?
Faith in Christ is necessary to salvation, that is indeed clear. But it mus be a complete faith, faith in everyting Christ said, faith that overflows into ction, virtue, good works, St. James put it simply when he said: "Faith without works is dead."(James 2:14,17) and in James 2:24 of Revised Standard Version, states: " You see that a man is justified by works nd not by fith alone." God bless us and Pax Christi
1. Faith in Christ is incomplete and superstations if it does not mean faith in veerything Christ was and said and did. He presented Himself to the world as a Redeemer, indeed, but also as a teacher nd lawgiver. His constant stressing of the importance of obedience to God can only mean that it is necessary for a man's savaation, just s is belief in the merits of His passion and death.
2. Faith in Christ as a Redeemercaannot save a man who neglects to heed these specefic warnings He gave: "If thou wouldst enter into life, keep the commaandments."(Matt. 19:17 "Not every man that saith to me, Lord, Lord, shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he that doth the will of my Father who is in heaven."(Matt. 7:21)
3. Fith in Christ as a Redeemer should not blind one to the great effort He mde to show the world the evil nd the punishments of sin,and to inspire men to repent of and renounce sin. His pssion and death, while they paid a debt that men could not hve paid, were at the same time a dramtic appeal for sorrow for sin and reformtion of life as necessaary for salvtion.
4. The doctrine of faith alone as the means of salvation has led inevitably to the minimizing of the importnce of some of Christ's most severely promulgated laws. It has led many to deny His sttement that divorce nd remaarige are the same as adultery; it has induced maany to renounce obedience tospiritual authority, which He inculcated so clearly; it has mde it easy for men to defend their avarice and social injustice.
5. If faith alone were necessary for salvation, there would be no point in a general judgement at the end of the world, which Christ described as an event in which "every man will be judged according to his works." If good works are not necessary to salvation, why should any man be judge ccording to thier deeds?
Faith in Christ is necessary to salvation, that is indeed clear. But it mus be a complete faith, faith in everyting Christ said, faith that overflows into ction, virtue, good works, St. James put it simply when he said: "Faith without works is dead."(James 2:14,17) and in James 2:24 of Revised Standard Version, states: " You see that a man is justified by works nd not by fith alone." God bless us and Pax Christi
Thursday, December 6, 2007
Can the Bible Alone Guide You?
There are still many Christians who base their Christianisty on the Bible alone. This is evident from the fct that even outside the Catholic Church, no book sells more copies annually than the Bible. However, to try to mke the Bible the sole sourse of one's religious guidance is un reasonble and even impossible on the following considertions:1. The Bible itself nowhere says that in it alone is to be found the whole secret of salvation. Christ said to His Apostles "He that hereth you, hereth Me" (Luke 10:16), He nowhere said "He that readeth the Scriptures shall be saved."
2. God inspired the Bible, but did not intendit as a full formulry of belief nd prctice, like Catechism or creed. This is evident becuse Christ Himself never wrote line surely a strange omission if He intended men to be saaved by the written word. None of the New Testment was written until some time after Christ's deth, some not till severl score of years-which leves rather strange gap in the continution of his work if He came to teach and save through the written word.
3.Men who have climed the Bible to be a sufficient source of all religious truth, have in history given the strongest refutation of their 'Religion,' they sid, 'pure, complete, simple, unchngeable, comes solely from the Bible,'-and within 100 years fter the proclmtion of this principle there were over 3,000 different nd inconsistent religions all climing to be the simple, cler, unchngeable religion of the Bible.
4. If it were not for the infallible Catholic Church, no one today would know what the Bible was, nor what books were inspired by God. Out of innumerable books pretending to be lives of Christ, nd histories of the Apostles, and their letters to the faithful, the Church used the authority given her by Christ to decide:"This is authentic and inspired and this is not!" Bible Christins are unwittingly accepting the authority of the Church when they ccept the Bible as universally constituted today, even through they deny this in words.
To Catholics, the Bible is a prize possession, inspired by Almighty God, written to confirm and testify to mny of the truth Christ taught His first disciples, nd to make unmistakable the authority and organization of His Church. Catholics are granted indulgences for reding the Bible, becuse, preserved from misinterpreting its difficult passages by an infallible Chrurch, they can gain from it light and inspiration for their lives.
Sunday, December 2, 2007
The Affirmative speaker Pastor Rolly Lomo failed to establish a prima facie evidence to prove his proposition, while Brother Wendell presented the Biblical evidences and with standard references to distroy the proposition of the Affirmative Side, that the Bible alone is not the final authority because it is the product of the True Church founded by Christ.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
