{"id":268,"date":"2021-03-31T13:20:25","date_gmt":"2021-03-31T05:20:25","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.friendshipwaylife.org\/?p=268"},"modified":"2021-03-31T13:20:25","modified_gmt":"2021-03-31T05:20:25","slug":"why-did-christ-build-his-church","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/friendshipwaylife.org\/index.php\/2021\/03\/31\/why-did-christ-build-his-church\/","title":{"rendered":"Why did Christ build his Church?"},"content":{"rendered":"\n


<\/strong>http:\/\/forum.philboxing.com\/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=185726<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Why build the Church?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The answer to the question is so that Christ will be revealed to those whom God will draw to Jesus and for them to really know who he and what his purpose is. This answer is shown in Matthew 16:13-20 where in verse 18 Jesus declared that he will build his Church:

Matthew 16:13 When Jesus came into the region of Caesarea Philippi, He asked His disciples, saying, \u201cWho do men say that I, the Son of Man, am?\u201d\u00a0
14 So they said, \u201cSome say John the Baptist, some Elijah, and others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.\u201d\u00a0
15 He said to them, \u201cBut who do you say that I am?\u201d\u00a0
16 Simon Peter answered and said, \u201cYou are the Christ, the Son of the living God.\u201d\u00a0
17 Jesus answered and said to him, \u201cBlessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in heaven. 18 And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it. 19 And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.\u201d\u00a0
20 Then He commanded His disciples that they should tell no one that He was Jesus the Christ.

The conversation between Jesus and his disciples started with the question as to who men say Jesus was (verse 13). The disciples stated the guesses of men (verse 14) which were incorrect. Then God revealed who Jesus was to Peter who spoke out Christ’s identity (verses 15-17). After the disciples were told that he was “the Christ, the Son of the living God\u201d, Jesus told them that upon him (Christ) he will build his Church (verse 18).

The Church is linked with knowing Jesus as the Christ or the Messiah or the Savior or the Creator. The answer then to the question why did Christ build his Church is so that those who will be made a part of it will know him and his purpose. \u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In verse 20, Jesus specifically commanded “the disciples that they should tell no one that He was Jesus the Christ”. Those who will not be made part of the Body of Christ, the Church that Jesus built, in this age will not know, and will not even be interested in knowing, who “the Son of Man” is.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What is the Church Jesus built?<\/strong>

To really understand why did Christ build his Church requires knowing the identity of what is the Church Christ had built.

The Church refers to and is made up of people drawn by God to Jesus, granted repentance, and gifted with the Holy Spirit. It is people who comprise the Church and each one is a member of it.

1 Corinthians 12:27 Now you are the body of Christ, and members individually.

The “body of Christ” is the Church of which Jesus is the head.

Colossians 1:18 And He is the head of the body, the church, who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in all things He may have the preeminence. 

No one can apply to be part of the Church. It is God who draws a person from this world to get interested in Jesus and his message.

John 6:44, 65 And He said, \u201cTherefore I have said to you that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted to him by My Father.\u201d

When a drawn person positively responds to his calling, he will be saved from the death penalty of the sins he committed in ignorance as symbolized by the granting of repentance and his submission to baptism. He is then gifted with the Holy Spirit through the laying on of hands.

Acts 2:37 Now when they heard this, they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, \u201cMen and brethren, what shall we do?\u201d 38 Then Peter said to them, \u201cRepent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

It is at the point of receipt of the Holy Spirit when a person becomes part of the body of Christ. He becomes Christ’s. Otherwise, “he is not His”.

Romans 8:9 But you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. Now if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not His.

Over the years people who have been imbued with the Holy Spirit have died and new people are put into the body to take their place. The Church, not a building made of wood and stone but composed of people, continues to exist from the day it was built until this day and up to the day of Jesus’ return. 

The Church never ceased to exist over the years “and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it” as Jesus said (Matthew 16:18).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Church was built to resume man’s creation<\/strong>

Man’s salvation is not the primary purpose in Christ’s building the Church. Salvation is just a necessary step before man’s creation could proceed.

When Adam and Eve failed to eat the fruit of the tree of life and instead ate the fruit of the forbidden tree, man’s creation stalled. By bringing the death penalty upon themselves through the breaking of God’s commandment, Adam and Eve, and their descendants after them, needed to be saved from death before the creation process could resume. 

Adam and Eve knew God. But soon thereafter, outside of the Garden of Eden, man no longer knows who his creator is.

Jesus, as the executive of the God family, is the creator of all things “and without him nothing was made that was made”.

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.

It was the Logos (Word) who spoke and implemented the fashioning of the physical phase of man’s creation.
Genesis 1:26 Then God said, \u201cLet Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness…27 So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. 

The world, in general, does not know God. It is God who introduces Jesus Christ to men whose ears he heals to be able to hear God’s introduction.

Luke 9:35 And a voice came out of the cloud, saying, \u201cThis is My beloved Son. Hear Him!\u201d

In turn, it is Jesus who makes known the Father to the called out ones.

John 17:25 O righteous Father! The world has not known You, but I have known You; and these have known that You sent Me.

By knowing who Jesus and what his purpose is, the sheep (those who are Christ’s) know and follow his voice.

John 10:27 My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me.

The person who is in Christ recognizes Jesus as the Logos or Word – the Creator – and follows him. That person would proceed to the spiritual phase of the creation process which is the making of God’s image of love in that person. Such person, redirected from this world’s ways, is effectively “a new creation”. 

2 Corinthians 5:17 Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new.

For man to be made part of the Body of Christ is not primarily for his salvation but for the making of God’s image in him to proceed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As the building blocks of the Church the members are taught about God’s government and led in the Godly image building process<\/strong>

It is only in the Church Jesus Christ built where knowing God and his purpose of creating man in his image are taught. One of the crucial lessons is to continually emulate and have the humble mind of Christ Jesus.

Philippians 2:5 Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, 7 but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men.

The converts are instructed to work on being transformed in outlook from being worldly by the renewing of the mind to conform to the “will of God”. 

Romans 12:2 And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.

The object of the transformation is the attainment of “the glory of the Lord”, that “same image from glory to glory”.

2 Corinthians 3:18 But we all, with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as by the Spirit of the Lord.

God’s image to be transformed into is love “for God is love”.

1 John 4:8…for God is love.

It is only when man shall have overcome and developed God’s image of love in him, with the help of the Holy Spirit, that he shall be changed at Christ’s return to spirit and finally become in the likeness of God who is Spirit. 

1 Corinthians 15:52 in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.

God is not discriminating for a select few and disregarding the many. God will continue to create his image of love on everyone and finish his creating them by changing their physical bodies into his likeness of being a spirit. It is just a matter of order. A few people were taught and led personally by Jesus Christ who then teach and lead the people drawn by God and made part of the Church in this age.

Jesus built the Church to prepare a group of people who would teach the majority when their time comes for them to be saved from death and their turn for the Godly image building process to proceed until they are likewise changed to spirit in God’s likeness. And this is in the age following the next age the bible refers to as the great white throne judgment.

Revelation 5:10 And have made us (them) kings (mayors, governors) and priests (teachers) to our God; And we (they) shall reign on the earth.\u201d

Revelation 20:11 Then I saw a great white throne and Him who sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away. And there was found no place for them. 12 And I saw the dead, small and great, standing before God, and books (“biblios” or the books of the bible) were opened.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the Church the government of God is re-introduced to increase in scope no end<\/strong>

When Adam and Eve sinned, God’s creation of man was stayed until this flaw in the creation process is remedied. The considered possibility of man sinning and of Christ’s paying for the penalty of death (Revelation 13:8) so that man’s creation would not fail had to be implemented. And Christ did become flesh (John 1:14) shedding off his God nature (Philippians 2:6-8) for the purpose of death and he did die.

Hebrews 2:9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels, for the suffering of death crowned with glory and honor, that He, by the grace of God, might taste death for everyone.

Having been raised from the dead (Acts 13:30), Christ’s creation of man could already proceed. Man has to be re-introduced to his creator, be saved and progress to the Godly image building phase of his creation.

The individuals indwelt by the Holy Spirit become parts to form the spiritual body of Christ, the Church of God (Acts 20:28). In this group of people the government of God is re-introduced to man who, in the process of building God’s image in him, struggles in his lifetime to submit to God’s reign until the end of his life or Christ’s return whichever comes first.

This government of God now operating only in the Church Jesus built, will be expanded to be enforced in this world at Christ’s return. It will be at that time when Isaiah’s prophecy of God’s government being upon Jesus’ shoulder will be fulfilled and it will increase no end.

Isaiah 9:6 For unto us a Child is born, 
Unto us a Son is given; 
And the government will be upon His shoulder. 
And His name will be called 
Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, 
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. 
7 Of the increase of His government and peace 
There will beno end…

The related thread, “Where is the Church Jesus Built?”, is in this link: 
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=158517<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

FORUM<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

genetophile: <\/strong>roland21 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

if religion will not save you, eh bakit po itinatag ni Cristo ang Iglesia nia?.. –> mat. 16:18<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Naku roland, isa pang thread yan. Gusto mo ipakilala kita kay Ka Epi? Mas may tiyaga yun sumagot.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA: <\/strong>The answer to the question is so that Christ will be revealed to those whom God will draw to Jesus and for them to really know who he and what his purpose is. This answer is shown in Matthew 16:13-20 where in verse 18 Jesus declared that he will build his Church:

Matthew 13:13 When Jesus came into the region of Caesarea Philippi, He asked His disciples, saying, \u201cWho do men say that I, the Son of Man, am?\u201d\u00a0
14 So they said, \u201cSome say John the Baptist, some Elijah, and others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.\u201d\u00a0
15 He said to them, \u201cBut who do you say that I am?\u201d\u00a0
16 Simon Peter answered and said, \u201cYou are the Christ, the Son of the living God.\u201d\u00a0
17 Jesus answered and said to him, \u201cBlessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in heaven. 18 And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it. 19 And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.\u201d\u00a0
20 Then He commanded His disciples that they should tell no one that He was Jesus the Christ.

The conversation between Jesus and his disciples started with the question as to who men say Jesus was (verse 13). The disciples stated the guesses of men (verse 14) which were incorrect. Then God revealed who Jesus was to Peter who spoke out Christ’s identity (verses 15-17). After the disciples were told that he was “the Christ, the Son of the living God\u201d, Jesus told them that upon him (Christ) he will build his Church (verse 18).

The Church is linked with knowing Jesus as the Christ or the Messiah or the Savior or the Creator. The answer then to the question why did Christ build his Church is so that those who will be made a part of it will know him and his purpose.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In verse 20, Jesus specifically commanded “the disciples that they should tell no one that He was Jesus the Christ”. Those who will not be made part of the Body of Christ, the Church that Jesus built, in this age will not know, and will not even be interested in knowing, who “the Son of Man” is.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

genetophile: <\/strong>Matthew 16:18 And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ka Epi, sino daw yung “rock” na sinasabi ni Jesus?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA: <\/strong>Jesus Christ is the “spiritual Rock” referred to in Matthew 16:18. Jesus’ identity is the subject matter of the conversation in Matthew 16:13-20. For such an important undertaking of building the Church, the foundation Rock could not be Peter, the stone, as many misunderstand, but Christ.

Jesus has always been the Rock even during Moses’ day. Paul is specific as to who is “that Rock”.

1 Corinthians 10:1 Moreover, brethren, I do not want you to be unaware that all our fathers were under the cloud, all passed through the sea, 2 all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea, 3 all ate the same spiritual food, 4 and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them, and that Rock was Christ.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

genetophile: <\/strong>Therefore, hindi si Peter. kasi pagkakaalam ko Peter means “pebble.” tama ba ka epi?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA: <\/strong>Pebble or stone. Peter is not the center of the conversation in Matthew 16:13-20. Even the matter of the “keys of heaven” were addressed to the disciples present, including Peter, and not to Peter only.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Mang Heruino: <\/strong>Brother Epi, these are very good posts. 

Allow me to ask, does it mean -according to your post- that the CHURCH isn’t a building or an organization?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA: <\/strong>According to the bible “the CHURCH isn’t a” physical building made of wood and iron and concrete but “an organization” or a grouping of people who are as a whole considered as a “building” in the spiritual sense. 

1 Corinthians 3:9 For we are God\u2019s fellow workers; you are God\u2019s field, you are God\u2019s building. 

A spiritual building the foundation laid for which is Jesus Christ himself. 

1 Corinthians 3:11 For no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.

Individually, the Holy Spirit indwelt persons are temples of God or dwelling places of the Holy Spirit.

1 Corinthians 3:16 Do you not know that you are the temple of God and that the Spirit of God dwells in you? 17 If anyone defiles the temple of God, God will destroy him. For the temple of God is holy, which temple you are.

I haven’t read in the bible of “Church” being used to refer to a physical building.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

el Kapre: <\/strong>Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Pebble or stone. Peter is not the center of the conversation in Matthew 16:13-20. Even the matter of the “keys of heaven” were addressed to the disciples present, including Peter, and not to Peter only.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

i beg to disagree ka epi.
first petros and petra were synonyms in ancient greek poetry.
both could mean pebble or large rock.

Jesus was the center of the conversation, yes..but so was peter.
Jesus was quoting Isaiah 22:21-22 almost word for word. 

20 \u201cIn that day I will summon my servant, Eliakim son of Hilkiah. 21 I will clothe him with your robe and fasten your sash around him and hand your authority over to him. He will be a father to those who live in Jerusalem and to the people of Judah. 22 I will place on his shoulder the key to the house of David; what he opens no one can shut, and what he shuts no one can open”

It is clear that Jesus was giving an authority, a minister-like, a chief to peter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA: <\/strong>Feel free to disagree el kaps.  

As to the Church, which is the body composed of members one of whom is Peter, the “chief” is no other than Jesus Christ himself, “the chief cornerstone”.

Ephesians 2:19 Now, therefore, you are no longer strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, 20 having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief cornerstone…

Jesus did not appoint Peter to be “chief” of the disciples. If one wants to see somebody who appears to be “chief” or having the final say during their time, it is James who made the “judgment” which settled an issue concerning the Gentiles where Paul, Peter and the other apostles spoke (Acts 15:1-19).

Acts 15:19 \u201cAnd so my judgment is that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God. 20 Instead, we should write and tell them to abstain from eating food offered to idols, from sexual immorality, from eating the meat of strangled animals, and from consuming blood. 21 For these laws of Moses have been preached in Jewish synagogues in every city on every Sabbath for many generations.\u201d

Jesus did not or does not deal with one apostle only. Paul was converted later than Peter. And Peter did not appoint Paul. Paul was appointed directly by Jesus Christ and not by any of the apostles or group of apostles ahead of him.

Galatians 1:1 This letter is from Paul, an apostle. I was not appointed by any group of people or any human authority, but by Jesus Christ himself and by God the Father, who raised Jesus from the dead.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

el Kapre: <\/strong>but also remember ka epi that Jesus changed the name of Simon to Peter.
Biblically, a name change denotes a change in status as well.
Abram to Abraham, Jacob to Israel

john 21:15-17 Jesus instructed Peter to feed his sheep and feed his lamb.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA: <\/strong>The name change and the giving of the instruction are separated by quite a span of time that the connection is unlike those in the case of Abraham and Israel. The instruction was given after Christ’s resurrection while the name change happened when Peter first saw Jesus when he was brought to Jesus by his brother Andrew.

John 1:35 Again, the next day, John stood with two of his disciples. 36 And looking at Jesus as He walked, he said, \u201cBehold the Lamb of God!\u201d\u00a0
37 The two disciples heard him speak, and they followed Jesus. 38 Then Jesus turned, and seeing them following, said to them, \u201cWhat do you seek?\u201d\u00a0
They said to Him, \u201cRabbi\u201d (which is to say, when translated, Teacher), \u201cwhere are You staying?\u201d\u00a0
39 He said to them, \u201cCome and see.\u201d They came and saw where He was staying, and remained with Him that day (now it was about the tenth hour).\u00a0
40 One of the two who heard John speak, and followed Him, was Andrew, Simon Peter\u2019s brother. 41 He first found his own brother Simon, and said to him, \u201cWe have found the Messiah\u201d (which is translated, the Christ). 42 And he brought him to Jesus.\u00a0
Now when Jesus looked at him, He said, \u201cYou are Simon the son of Jonah. You shall be called Cephas\u201d (which is translated, A Stone).

The asking of the question “do you love me?” in John 21 was repeated 3 times.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

John 21:15 So when they had eaten breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, \u201cSimon, son of Jonah, do you love Me more than these?\u201d\u00a0
He said to Him, \u201cYes, Lord; You know that I love You.\u201d\u00a0
He said to him, \u201cFeed My lambs.\u201d\u00a0
16 He said to him again a second time, \u201cSimon, son of Jonah, do you love Me?\u201d\u00a0
He said to Him, \u201cYes, Lord; You know that I love You.\u201d\u00a0
He said to him, \u201cTend My sheep.\u201d\u00a0
17 He said to him the third time, \u201cSimon, son of Jonah, do you love Me?\u201d Peter was grieved because He said to him the third time, \u201cDo you love Me?\u201d\u00a0
And he said to Him, \u201cLord, You know all things; You know that I love You.\u201d\u00a0
Jesus said to him, \u201cFeed My sheep.\u00a0

There is significance in the repetitious question which “grieved” Peter. Jesus was inculcating in Peter the importance of loyalty.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Before Christ’s crucifixion, Peter, and so did “all the disciples”, declared that he will not deny Christ. But Christ told him that he will be so scared of death he will deny Christ 3 times before the rooster crows in the morning. 

Matthew 26:31 Then Jesus said to them, \u201cAll of you will be made to stumble because of Me this night, for it is written: 
\u2018I will strike the Shepherd,
And the sheep of the flock will be scattered.\u2019
32 But after I have been raised, I will go before you to Galilee.\u201d
33 Peter answered and said to Him, \u201cEven if all are made to stumble because of You, I will never be made to stumble.\u201d 
34 Jesus said to him, \u201cAssuredly, I say to you that this night, before the rooster crows, you will deny Me three times.\u201d 
35 Peter said to Him, \u201cEven if I have to die with You, I will not deny You!\u201d 
And so said all the disciples.

When the trying situation happened, Peter denied Christ first to “a servant girl”, the second to “another girl”, and the third to some bystanders.

Matthew 26:69 Now Peter sat outside in the courtyard. And a servant girl came to him, saying, \u201cYou also were with Jesus of Galilee.\u201d 
70 But he denied it before them all, saying, \u201cI do not know what you are saying.\u201d 
71 And when he had gone out to the gateway, another girl saw him and said to those who were there, \u201cThis fellow also was with Jesus of Nazareth.\u201d 
72 But again he denied with an oath, \u201cI do not know the Man!\u201d 
73 And a little later those who stood by came up and said to Peter, \u201cSurely you also are one of them, for your speech betrays you.\u201d 
74 Then he began to curse and swear, saying, \u201cI do not know the Man!\u201d 
Immediately a rooster crowed. 75 And Peter remembered the word of Jesus who had said to him, \u201cBefore the rooster crows, you will deny Me three times.\u201d So he went out and wept bitterly.

By his denials Peter failed in a loyalty test. When Jesus gave the instructions to Peter in John 21:15-17, it was some sort of restoration of Peter’s standing as a loyal disciple of Jesus. The loyalty that Peter would then have is one which led to his martyrdom.

John 21:18 Most assuredly, I say to you, when you were younger, you girded yourself and walked where you wished; but when you are old, you will stretch out your hands, and another will gird you and carry you where you do not wish.\u201d

In asking the repeated questions and giving the repeated instructions, Jesus was not making Peter the head of the other disciples. The sheep and the lamb refer to disciples who would be called later when Jesus shall have sent the Holy Spirit to begin the formation of the Church. The function of feeding and tending sheep is common to all the disciples who then became apostles.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

el Kapre:  <\/strong>Were there any other apostles given same instruction to feed sheeps and lambs?
Were there any other apostles who got a name change other simon and saul?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA: <\/strong>el Kapre wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Were there any other apostles given same instruction to feed sheeps and lambs?
————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Let’s read a passage.

Matthew 28:16 Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, to the mountain which Jesus had appointed for them. 17 When they saw Him, they worshiped Him; but some doubted. 
18 And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, \u201cAll authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. 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, 20 teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.\u201d 

The above quoted passage shows the answer to your question is in the affirmative. Sheep and lambs symbolize the new converts or babes in Christ and feeding and tending refer to “teaching them to observe all things that” Jesus had commanded the then disciples who became apostles. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

el Kapre wrote:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Were there any other apostles who got a name change other simon and saul?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I can’t think of any other. But what’s the point? The name change didn’t make Peter or Paul better than the other apostles whose names weren’t changed. One apostle plants and the other waters. It doesn’t make one’s work of greater importance in the body of Christ than the other’s.

1 Corinthians 3:5 Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers through whom you believed, as the Lord gave to each one? 6 I planted, Apollos watered, but God gave the increase. 7 So then neither he who plants is anything, nor he who waters, but God who gives the increase. 8 Now he who plants and he who waters are one, and each one will receive his own reward according to his own labor.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

el Kapre: <\/strong>What’s the point?
Point is, if name change has no importance at all, then why would JC bother to do so?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA: <\/strong>I’m not saying “name change has no importance at all”.  I am just pointing out that Jesus’ changing the name of Simon bar Jonah to Stone or Peter when they first met did not make Peter the head of the disciples.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

patutsky<\/strong>: <\/strong>Sir Epi…I kinda remember a verse whereby Christ told his disciples that whatever he speaks,the FATHER WAS SPEAKING THROUGH HIM(Christ the Son). 
And on this ROCK I will built my Church could simply be attributed to the Father at that time …..to be revealed later on as ”The Church of God!” after Christ`s resurrection seating unto the right hand of the Father.

His mission was deemed fulfilled as the Head of the Church as what the FATHER HAD PROMISE.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA: <\/strong>I’m not sure if you are referring to this verse.

John 12:50 And I know that His command is everlasting life. Therefore, whatever I speak, just as the Father has told Me, so I speak.\u201d

The Father does not deal or speak directly to men but through Christ or angels. But it is not at all times that “whatever he speaks, the FATHER WAS SPEAKING THROUGH HIM”. Christ also speaks his own mind like when he prays to the Father.

Matthew 26:39 He went a little farther and fell on His face, and prayed, saying, \u201cO My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from Me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as You will.\u201d

Building the Church is not all that Christ had to do with it. He is still transforming the image of its members to conform to God’s until such time when they will be changed to spirit and be like God who is Spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

patutsky: <\/strong>Thanks Mang Epi!\u00a0\u00a0

Hoy Gorio! Christ has pagkataong-labas and Pagka-taong Loob when he speaks!
Kaya yung ipinako siya sa cruz at nagsambit ng I thirst….Nauuhaw talaga yan,wala ng dapat na interpretasyon yun dahil ang nagsasalita ay pagka-taong labas niya.

Pero when he told the Father\u00a0

Juan Chapter 17:1 Sinabi ni Jesus ang mga bagay na ito at tumingin siya sa langit at nagsabi:\u00a0Ama, ang oras ay dumating na. Luwalhatiin mo ang iyong Anak at nang luwalhatiin ka rin naman ng Anak.

5 Ngayon, Ama, luwalhatiin mo ako sa iyong sarili ng kaluwalhatiang taglay kong kasama ka bago pa likhain ang sanlibutan.Nagsasalita ang pagkataong loob niya.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA: <\/strong>You’re welcome mang patuts. You should post more often like before. <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20: <\/strong>Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Christ also speaks his own mind like when he prays to the Father.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

mang epie,
so christ and father god are not really ONE!!!!
christ sometimes doesnt speak the mind of the father….

or it is just your interpretation….

beware mang epie… you are not following the bible… and also you are not following your own dictum

BWAHAHAHAHAH + BWAHAHAHAHAH – BWAHAHAHAHA = BWAHAHAHAH<\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA: <\/strong>I am “following the bible” mang gorio. And what is my “dictum” which I am not following?\u00a0\u00a0

If you have read and now must remember my discussion with Tony in an old thread, my understanding of “God” is that it is ONE family or kingdom now composed of TWO beings, God and the Word, Jesus Christ (John 1:1), who are known to and accepted by some people now as the Father and the Son.

Ephesians 3:15 from whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named…

1 Corinthians 8:6 yet for us\u00a0there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we for Him;\u00a0and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and through whom we live.

God and the Word, while two beings, are ONE in purpose.\u00a0

John 10:24 Then the Jews surrounded Him and said to Him, \u201cHow long do You keep us in doubt? If You are the Christ, tell us plainly.\u201d\u00a0
25 Jesus answered them, \u201cI told you, and you do not believe.\u00a0The works that I do in My Father\u2019s name, they bear witness of Me…30\u00a0I and My Father are one.\u201d

The phrase “I and My Father are one” is mentioned in relation to the works that Jesus is doing in the Father’s name.

This purpose (\u201cworks\u201d) is to create man in their image according to\u00a0their\u00a0likeness.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Genesis 1:26 Then God said, \u201cLet Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness…

Being a separate being, Jesus was praying to another being, the Father, and not to himself.

Matthew 27:46 And about the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, saying, \u201cEli, Eli, lama sabachthani?\u201d that is, \u201cMy God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?\u201d

After the whole creation process of man is done, the family or kingdom of God will be increased in number composed of spirits: the Father, Jesus Christ, and the people who shall have been changed to spirit like God.

1 John 3:2 Beloved, now we are children of God; and it has not yet been revealed what we shall be, but we know that when He is revealed, we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20: <\/strong>ahhh ok ok mang epie… they are many of them pala!!!

the father and the son not “and\/or” the son… kita nyo na mang mystizo…
they are only ONE ” IN PURPOSE ” pala… can I use the word INTENTION instead of PURPOSE mang epie???

and according to your interpretation (with conviction) for sure they are two so far.. right? what about the spirit??? ahaahah ok…ok you explained in the last part… 
why there is a word ” like ” between spirit and god??? so you mean they are not equal??? hhhmmmmm and on the Jesus part praying to father god… it really seems they are not equal hhhmmmm…

mang epie, magkakasala pa ba tayo kapag nakumpleto na nya tayong gawin in his own likeness???

the dictum part yoong sinabi mo ba na ” according to the baybol “….

and in Gen 1:26 god was not successful in making man in his own likeness pala.. because it is still in process right?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA: <\/strong>gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

can I use the word INTENTION instead of PURPOSE mang epie???<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

By all means mang gorio!<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

and according to your interpretation (with conviction) for sure they are two so far.. right?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Not my “interpretation (with conviction) for sure they are two so far” but according to a clear statement in John 1:1.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

what about the spirit??? ahaahah ok…ok you explained in the last part…
why there is a word ” like ” between spirit and god???<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

“Like” as in likeness mang gorio. The still unfinished creation man now is physical composed of flesh, blood, bones. A spirit is not like that. God will change man to spirit “according” to God’s “likeness” (Gen. 1:26). Man will be like God.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

so you mean they are not equal??? hhhmmmmm and on the Jesus part praying to father god… it really seems they are not equal hhhmmmm…<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

It’s not that I mean it. Jesus says so. 

John 14:28 You have heard Me say to you, \u2018I am going away and coming back to you.\u2019 If you loved Me, you would rejoice because I said, \u2018I am going to the Father,\u2019 for My Father is greater than I.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

the dictum part yoong sinabi mo ba na ” according to the baybol “….<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ok, then it still is.  <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

mang epie, magkakasala pa ba tayo kapag nakumpleto na nya tayong gawin in his own likeness???<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Not anymore. 

1 John 3:9 Whoever has been born of God (changed to spirit) does not sin, for His seed remains in him; and he cannot sin, because he has been born of God.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

and in Gen 1:26 god was not successful in making man in his own likeness pala.. because it is still in process right?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

It’s not that God “was not successful”. In the creation process where God gave man freewill, the creation, man, has a part to do and this is to choose whether to follow God or not. Adam chose not to follow God and his decision merely stalled the creation process. 

God would not be God if he fails. He would not fail. Presently, the salvation sub-process and the spiritual phase – the Godly image creation phase – of the creation process are on stream on some in this age and in the ages to come, on the rest.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20: <\/strong>Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

“Like” as in likeness mang gorio. The still unfinished creation man now is physical composed of flesh, blood, bones. A spirit is not like that. God will change man to spirit “according” to God’s “likeness” (Gen. 1:26). Man will be like God.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

he already did, man created in his own likeness mang epie, just right read the next verse…

here it is…
Genesis 1:27 (New International Version, \u00a92010)

27 So God created mankind in his own image,
in the image of God he created them;
male and female he created them. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

It’s not that I mean it. Jesus says so. 

John 14:28 You have heard Me say to you, \u2018I am going away and coming back to you.\u2019 If you loved Me, you would rejoice because I said, \u2018I am going to the Father,\u2019 for My Father is greater than I.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

aahhh ok..ok..<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ok, then it still is.  <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

we will see about that… same as above…<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Not anymore.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

si adan at si eva nagkasala pa rin accordin to the baybol di ba… god create them in his own image… so ano ba talaga kuya…. mukhang di totoo yaang verse na yaan ah<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

It’s not that God “was not successful”. In the creation process where God gave man freewill, the creation, man, has a part to do and this is to choose whether to follow God or not. Adam chose not to follow God and his decision merely stalled the creation process. 

God would not be God if he fails. He would not fail. Presently, the salvation process and the spiritual phase – the Godly image creation phase – of the creation process is on stream on some in this age and in the ages to come, on the rest.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

we still have free will di ba, so magkakasala at magkakasala pa rin tayo…
kailan tayo mawawalan ng free will??…. 
he already failed, according to Gen 1:27 god already did created man in own image… and yet si adan at si eba hindi pa rin perfect hindi pa rin god like…NAGKASALA PA RIN…
and the irony is, the verse that you use to substantiate your claim that man is still under the process of creation was already concluded with the verse right next to it…
one last question and the most important one I have:

Is there anything in the baybol tell you which verse should use to support the other verse?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA: <\/strong>gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

ok thank you mang epie… i really mean it…bwahahahah<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

You’re welcome mang gorio.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

he already did, man created in his own likeness mang epie, just right read the next verse…

here it is…
Genesis 1:27 (New International Version, \u00a92010)

27 So God created mankind in his own image,
in the image of God he created them;
male and female he created them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I’m not surprised with your conclusion mang gorio. Like you, I thought at first that man’s creation was done at that point. But reading another passage in Genesis Chapter 3 led me to realize man was not yet like God. Verse 27 doesn’t mention likeness.\u00a0

To be like God:
1. Man has to know the difference between good and evil. Before Adam and Eve ate the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil and after they were “created” in Genesis 1:27, they were not yet like God in knowing good and evil. It was only after eating of the forbidden tree that they became, albeit in the negative manner, became like one of the God beings in the aspect of knowing good and evil.\u00a0

Genesis 3:22 Then the LORD God said, \u201cBehold, the man has become like one of Us, to know good and evil.\u00a0

There are still many aspects of God’s likeness for man to acquire.

2. Man should be able to live forever. Adam & Eve did not eat the fruit of the tree of life but instead ate the fruit of the forbidden tree.

Genesis 3:22…And now, lest he put out his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever\u201d\u2014

The whole creation process needs a positive input from man between the first and second phases of the process. And this is to rightly choose by submitting to God’s will and not his own or another’s. When man chose the latter, the creation process was stayed pending rectification of the flaw which occurred.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Man is not yet like God after Gen. 1:27. Man is physical and mortal while God is Spirit and immortal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

si adan at si eva nagkasala pa rin accordin to the baybol di ba… god create them in his own image… so ano ba talaga kuya…. mukhang di totoo yaang verse na yaan ah<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

As pointed out, Adam and Eve were not yet “finished products” at Gen. 1:27. <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

we still have free will di ba, so magkakasala at magkakasala pa rin tayo…
kailan tayo mawawalan ng free will??….<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

While having freewill means having the freedom to commit sin, it does not follow that a being who has freewill, will sin. God has freewill yet he always chooses not to sin. When man becomes like God, he will always choose not to sin.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

he already failed, according to Gen 1:27 god already did created man in own image… and yet si adan at si eba hindi pa rin perfect hindi pa rin god like…NAGKASALA PA RIN…
and the irony is, the verse that you use to substantiate your claim that man is still under the process of creation was already concluded with the verse right next to it…<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

As pointed out above, Adam and Eve were not yet like God the glaring proof of which is that they sinned. As explained, Gen. 1:27 is merely the end of the physical creation phase. God did not fail. It was man who failed. It was his part which did not materialize as intended.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

one last question and the most important one I have:

Is there anything in the baybol tell you which verse should use to support the other verse?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

None. The practice of quoting bible “verses” to support a position is patterned from Jesus’ practice. As could be read in the New Testament, which was not yet existing in Jesus’ time, Jesus quoted from “verses” of the scriptures available then to prove his point to his hearers, the Jews, who were familiar with the passages.

Now that both testaments are available, and the fact that the whole 70 books of the bible are united in the main message, a bible student can use a verse to support another verse. Citing and understanding bible verses promotes growth in the knowledge of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20:<\/strong>  Ok its good that you are aware of the situation of your Dyesus back then. Now I will try to be in on that situation. I will try to quote verses and support it available only during his time. And mind you I will use as well your favorite dictum – according to the baybol…

You are misleading mang epie, that verse 3:22 was part of an attempt to explain the detail explanation on the whole 6 day of creation. Even in Gen 2:4 it is stated there that it was an account of the whole finished process.
And the word likeness there is misleading too, after adam and eve have sinned it is already concluded there that they are finally in LIKENESS with god. So that means the process was completed\u2026

From this chronology of event in Gen 1:26 those provision were already met. YOUR INTERPRETATION that right now as we speak your god is still in the process of creation is wrong\u2026
Look at the provision in of Gen 1:26
1) In his own image \u2013 supported by Gen1:27 and even in Gen1:31 you will see that god was satisfied\u2026
2) In their likeness \u2013 supported by Gen3:22
3) god had already given man full thrust as you can see on Gen1:28~30 . man was already in likeness with god, it just so happen or maybe the concept was designed Adam and Eve to sin to know right from wrong.

Even in Gen 2:2 it is stated there that god had finished it.

2 By the seventh day God had finished the work he had been doing; so on the seventh day he rested from all his work. 3 Then God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it he rested from all the work of creating that he had done. 
After he was satisfied (Gen1:31) on the end of 6th day, re-assess again on the 7th day then rested\u2026

It was reinforced and reaffirmed Gen 5:1 that creation of mankind was already done.Genesis 5
From Adam to Noah
1 This is the written account of Adam\u2019s family line. 
When God created mankind, he made them in the likeness of God. 2 He created them male and female and blessed them. And he named them \u201cMankind\u201d[a] when they were created. 

Genesis 2 (New International Version, \u00a92010)
Genesis 1 : 26 -31
26 Then God said, \u201cLet us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals,[a] and over all the creatures that move along the ground.\u201d 
27 So God created mankind in his own image, 
in the image of God he created them; 
male and female he created them. 
28 God blessed them and said to them, \u201cBe fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.\u201d 
29 Then God said, \u201cI give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food. 30 And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds in the sky and all the creatures that move along the ground\u2014everything that has the breath of life in it\u2014I give every green plant for food.\u201d And it was so. 
31 God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning\u2014the sixth day. 

Genesis 2 (New International Version, \u00a92010)
Genesis 2
1 Thus the heavens and the earth were completed in all their vast array. 
2 By the seventh day God had finished the work he had been doing; so on the seventh day he rested from all his work. 3 Then God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it he rested from all the work of creating that he had done. 
Adam and Eve
4 This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created, when the LORD God made the earth and the heavens. 
5 Now no shrub had yet appeared on the earth[a] and no plant had yet sprung up, for the LORD God had not sent rain on the earth and there was no one to work the ground, 6 but streams[b] came up from the earth and watered the whole surface of the ground. 7 Then the LORD God formed a man[c] from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being. 
8 Now the LORD God had planted a garden in the east, in Eden; and there he put the man he had formed. 9 The LORD God made all kinds of trees grow out of the ground\u2014trees that were pleasing to the eye and good for food. In the middle of the garden were the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. 
10 A river watering the garden flowed from Eden; from there it was separated into four headwaters. 11 The name of the first is the Pishon; it winds through the entire land of Havilah, where there is gold. 12 (The gold of that land is good; aromatic resin[d] and onyx are also there.) 13 The name of the second river is the Gihon; it winds through the entire land of Cush.[e] 14 The name of the third river is the Tigris; it runs along the east side of Ashur. And the fourth river is the Euphrates. 
15 The LORD God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it. 16 And the LORD God commanded the man, \u201cYou are free to eat from any tree in the garden; 17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die.\u201d 
18 The LORD God said, \u201cIt is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.\u201d 
19 Now the LORD God had formed out of the ground all the wild animals and all the birds in the sky. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name. 20 So the man gave names to all the livestock, the birds in the sky and all the wild animals. 
But for Adam[f] no suitable helper was found. 21 So the LORD God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man\u2019s ribs[g] and then closed up the place with flesh. 22 Then the LORD God made a woman from the rib[h] he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man. 
23 The man said, 
\u201cThis is now bone of my bones 
and flesh of my flesh; 
she shall be called \u2018woman,\u2019 
for she was taken out of man.\u201d 
24 That is why a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh. 
25 Adam and his wife were both naked, and they felt no shame. 

Genesis 3 (New International Version, \u00a92010)
Genesis 3
The Fall
1 Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the LORD God had made. He said to the woman, \u201cDid God really say, \u2018You must not eat from any tree in the garden\u2019?\u201d 
2 The woman said to the serpent, \u201cWe may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, 3 but God did say, \u2018You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.\u2019\u201d 
4 \u201cYou will not certainly die,\u201d the serpent said to the woman. 5 \u201cFor God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.\u201d 
6 When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it. 7 Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized they were naked; so they sewed fig leaves together and made coverings for themselves. 
8 Then the man and his wife heard the sound of the LORD God as he was walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and they hid from the LORD God among the trees of the garden. 9 But the LORD God called to the man, \u201cWhere are you?\u201d 
10 He answered, \u201cI heard you in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked; so I hid.\u201d 
11 And he said, \u201cWho told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree that I commanded you not to eat from?\u201d 
12 The man said, \u201cThe woman you put here with me\u2014she gave me some fruit from the tree, and I ate it.\u201d 
13 Then the LORD God said to the woman, \u201cWhat is this you have done?\u201d 
The woman said, \u201cThe serpent deceived me, and I ate.\u201d 
14 So the LORD God said to the serpent, \u201cBecause you have done this, 
\u201cCursed are you above all livestock 
and all wild animals! 
You will crawl on your belly 
and you will eat dust 
all the days of your life. 
15 And I will put enmity 
between you and the woman, 
and between your offspring[a] and hers; 
he will crush[b] your head, 
and you will strike his heel.\u201d 
16 To the woman he said, 
\u201cI will make your pains in childbearing very severe; 
with painful labor you will give birth to children. 
Your desire will be for your husband, 
and he will rule over you.\u201d 
17 To Adam he said, \u201cBecause you listened to your wife and ate fruit from the tree about which I commanded you, \u2018You must not eat from it,\u2019 
\u201cCursed is the ground because of you; 
through painful toil you will eat food from it 
all the days of your life. 
18 It will produce thorns and thistles for you, 
and you will eat the plants of the field. 
19 By the sweat of your brow 
you will eat your food 
until you return to the ground, 
since from it you were taken; 
for dust you are 
and to dust you will return.\u201d 
20 Adam[c] named his wife Eve,[d] because she would become the mother of all the living. 
21 The LORD God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife and clothed them. 22 And the LORD God said, \u201cThe man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.\u201d 23 So the LORD God banished him from the Garden of Eden to work the ground from which he had been taken. 24 After he drove the man out, he placed on the east side[e] of the Garden of Eden cherubim and a flaming sword flashing back and forth to guard the way to the tree of life. 

mang epie,
after reading these for sure you will notice we have different view right??. both of them use the same dictum, according to the baybol… mine didnt use a verse from NT to support the OT or vise versa… so which one is more credible???

can we say now that you have a different ” INTERPRETATION ” from my view??? both of them are from the baybol…<\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA: <\/strong>gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ok its good that you are aware of the situation of your Dyesus back then. Now I will try to be in on that situation. I will try to quote verses and support it available only during his time. And mind you I will use as well your favorite dictum – according to the baybol…<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

You can quote the bible as you like mang gorio. Again, “according to the bible”, even Satan quoted scriptures and used the same, in the negative sense, however, in his encounter with Jesus Christ.

Matthew 4:5 Then the devil took Him up into the holy city, set Him on the pinnacle of the temple, 6 and said to Him, \u201cIf You are the Son of God, throw Yourself down. For it is written: 
\u2018He shall give His angels charge over you,\u2019
and,
\u2018In their hands they shall bear you up,
Lest you dash your foot against a stone.\u2019\u201d <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

You are misleading mang epie, that verse 3:22 (of Genesis) was part of an attempt to explain the detail explanation on the whole 6 day of creation.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

“Misleading” is your opinion mang gorio. Frankly, I’m not even trying to lead you. My answers to your questions are directed more to those who are following our discussions and who have the “ears to hear”.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Even in Gen 2:4 it is stated there that it was an account of the whole finished process.
And the word likeness there is misleading too, after adam and eve have sinned it is already concluded there that they are finally in LIKENESS with god. So that means the process was completed\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The likeness mentioned is clearly limited only in the capability “to know good and evil”. 

Genesis 3:22 Then the LORD God said, \u201cBehold, the man has become like one of Us, to know good and evil. 

The comparison is simple enough. Adam and Eve were clearly physical, mortal. They had bones, flesh, blood. They are dust.

Genesis 3:19 In the sweat of your face you shall eat bread
Till you return to the ground, 
For out of it you were taken; 
For dust you are,
And to dust you shall return.\u201d 

Whereas God is Spirit. 

John 4:24 God is Spirit…<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

From this chronology of event in Gen 1:26 those provision were already met. YOUR INTERPRETATION that right now as we speak your god is still in the process of creation is wrong\u2026<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

If you adhere to the view that dust and spirit are alike, I will not even attempt to disturb it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

mang epie,
after reading these for sure you will notice we have different view right??. both of them use the same dictum, according to the baybol… mine didnt use a verse from NT to support the OT or vise versa… so which one is more credible??? 

can we say now that you have a different ” INTERPRETATION ” from my view??? both of them are from the baybol…<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

We can absolutely agree mang gorio that “we have different view”. Here’s another of our opposing views. Yours is “INTERPRETATION” while mine is understanding.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20:<\/strong> No mang epie, its not your understanding anymore, the fact that you are spreading and showing your “understanding” its already an ” INTERPRETATION “… in fact I also use your dictum and according to the chronological account of genesis… so mine is Interpretation and yours is not.. how self patronizing that statement of yours…

why you forget to comment on Gen 5:1? that is the affirmation of the Gen 1:26. from the same writter of GENESIS…while yours is from writer of New Testatment…

so now that I have showed you that your dictum is a flawed one? which interpretation” is correct??

I rememeber last time from your post, a joke. If read back it will have different meaning..

here is the link:
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=112744&start=375<\/a>

so which one is more credible????<\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA: <\/strong>Let’s read Genesis 5:1 up to 5.

Genesis 5:1 This is the book of the genealogy of Adam. In the day that God created man, He made him in the likeness of God. 2 He created them male and female, and blessed them and called them Mankind in the day they were created. 3 And Adam lived one hundred and thirty years, and begot a son in his own likeness, after his image, and named him Seth. 4 After he begot Seth, the days of Adam were eight hundred years; and he had sons and daughters. 5 So all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years; and he died.

mang gorio, Adam died!!! If he were already like God, he would still be around even up to today!

So there must be some more to what can be read in Gen. 5:1 mang gorio aside from the use of the past tense “created” which are shown in the other verses of the bible. The whole bible is authored by only one being and verses in it complement one to the other. 

As to which is credible, don’t tell me you are giving room in yourself to find my posts credible to you. Far from it.  

(btw, it’s playing tennis time for me.  )<\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20: <\/strong>eyy may emoticon ulit…

non.no.no mang epie…

according to your belief it is authored by only one being, but according to others belief, like for example.. the Jew.. its not…di ba….bwahahahahah

on Gen 1:26 there is no mention of SPIRIT there, while the verse you use to support your claim has a SPIRIT… why is that? ..
can I say now that Gen 5:1 is more credible support to Gen1:26 from the author of the baybol???? 
or maybe in NT, Jesus corrected the “author” of Genesis 5:1… remember they have their own mind sabi mo nga!!! of course according to the bible…sabi mo rin…

there is no BETTER assertion of what Gen 1:26 saying than 5:1.. 
ang ganda-gandang ANALOGY nga noong joke mo eh… saktong-sakto… hehehehehe

your last comment, I have sense that there is something degrading on your 2nd to last comment… em ay rayt…

yep… and i’m very aware of that when I started commenting on this thread, mang epie… I think I’m ready kasi eh!!! I can be REFEREE too….. except for the grammar part ehhhhheheheh… remember I use your dictum ehhh… do you now agree that your dictum is flawed????<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Mang Heruino: <\/strong>Nice posts, bro. Epie. You explain really well. I had fun reading your posts and replies and I clearly understood your points. Keep it up. May the Lord bless you always.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA: <\/strong>I’m glad to know you “clearly understood” my points bro. MH. Thanks be to God!<\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA: <\/strong>gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

eyy may emoticon ulit…<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

If it bothers you, I won’t use anymore emoticons with you mang gorio.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

non.no.no mang epie…

according to your belief it is authored by only one being, but according to others belief, like for example.. the Jew.. its not…di ba….bwahahahahah<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

When I stated that the bible is authored by only one, God, I have a bible basis. 

2 Timothy 3:16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

on Gen 1:26 there is no mention of SPIRIT there, while the verse you use to support your claim has a SPIRIT… why is that? ..
can I say now that Gen 5:1 is more credible support to Gen1:26 from the author of the baybol???? 
or maybe in NT, Jesus corrected the “author” of Genesis 5:1… remember they have their own mind sabi mo nga!!! of course according to the bible…sabi mo rin…

there is no BETTER assertion of what Gen 1:26 saying than 5:1.. 

ang ganda-gandang ANALOGY nga noong joke mo eh… saktong-sakto… hehehehehe<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I don’t remember the joke mang gorio. Anyway, even if Gen 1:26 doesn’t describe God as Spirit, the bible student knows God is Spirit. Taking into the study all the verses pertaining to man’s creation, these are the stages:

1. Physical, mortal – God’s job
2. Exercise of freewill to choose God’s way or not – man’s job
3. When man sinned, creation stalled till sin is remedied – Lamb\/Jesus’ job
4. When Jesus died, he needed to be raised back to life – God’s job
5. Calling to repentance, salvation, giving of the Holy Spirit to man & leading man to be transformed in mind – the Father & Jesus’ job
6. Choosing to make God reign over his thoughts, words and actions – man
7. Changing the overcomer man to spirit and slaying those who don’t want God to reign over them – God 

This whole creation process is, in reality, the “good news” for man. He is given the opportunity to live forever!<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

your last comment, I have sense that there is something degrading on your 2nd to last comment… em ay rayt…<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Wrong. I don’t degrade anybody. Again, “according to the bible”,

Philippians 2:3 Let nothing be done through selfish ambition or conceit, but in lowliness of mind let each esteem others better than himself.
Let’s reread, if you don’t mind, my comment you cited: “As to which is credible, don’t tell me you are giving room in yourself to find my posts credible to you. Far from it.”

Let’s be frank. If you are slighted by the comment, then you must admit there is that possibility that you would believe my posts. If you are not slighted, then I am right that I could never make you conform to my views.

And even if we are poles apart in belief and unbelief, I don’t blame you or look down on you or any other person who does not believe what I believe. If I look down on any such person, then I go against God who has the prerogative to whom understanding is to be given in this age.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

yep… and i’m very aware of that when I started commenting on this thread, mang epie… I think I’m ready kasi eh!!! I can be REFEREE too….. except for the grammar part ehhhhheheheh… remember I use your dictum ehhh…<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I appreciate your comments mang gorio even if your intention was to disprove my points. Mang Heruino says “I had fun reading your posts and replies and I clearly understood your points”.

So mang gorio, keep commenting on my posts. The points you raise give me opportunities to share understanding to those who are ready to understand. And if I post in English, this is so that more people can understand the discussion.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

do you now agree that your dictum is flawed????<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

No.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20:<\/strong> Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

If it bothers you, I won’t use anymore emoticons with you mang gorio.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

not at all mang epie, it doesnt bother me at all. I just want to remind you that you may step out of bound. You might end up thinking playing TEYNIS but in reality your playing my game… and so far if you may have noticed by now, I have set aside my game….di ba…. and as much as possible I want to address it to you ONLY, so I will not be ACCOUNTABLE to other person here in this forum if he\/she UNDERSTOOD my point…<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

When I stated that the bible is authored by only one, God, I have a bible basis. 

2 Timothy 3:16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

just like I havwe mentioned above other didnt agree with that, the Jew doesnt recognized the NT and you know that…. AND THEY HAVE VERY GOOD REASON for that… example. YOU HAVE CONCLUDED THAT Dyesus HAVE HIS OWN MIND as you say. You even supported it with verse – A VERSE FROM NT- quoting Dyesus saying Father is greater than him…. and here is the most intriguing so far,.. only from our exchanges of view… in Gen 1:26 there is NO word SPIRIT there, and yet to support “UNDERSTANDING” that MANKIND is still in the process of creation there is a word SPIRIT… didnt ever occur to you that there is some BAWAS\/DAG-DAG there?… one more thing didnt ever to you that Dyesus was only QUOTED by the Apostle, and some of NT are just retelling of story, are not close to the truth… look at the CREDIBILTY of those apostle mang epie… even in a court of law in which I believe close to you will concluded that thaose APOSTLE are NOT CREDIBLE… … and just like what I have said, the Jew have a GOOD REASON to disagree with the NT… <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I don’t remember the joke mang gorio. Anyway, even if Gen 1:26 doesn’t describe God as Spirit, the bible student knows God is Spirit. Taking into the study all the verses pertaining to man’s creation, these are the stages:

1. Physical, mortal – God’s job
2. Exercise of freewill to choose God’s way or not – man’s job
3. When man sinned, creation stalled till sin is remedied – Lamb\/Jesus’ job
4. When Jesus died, he needed to be raised back to life – God’s job
5. Calling to repentance, salvation, giving of the Holy Spirit to man & leading man to be transformed in mind – the Father & Jesus’ job
6. Choosing to make God reign over his thoughts, words and actions – man
7. Changing the overcomer man to spirit and slaying those who don’t want God to reign over them – God 

This whole creation process is, in reality, the “good news” for man. He is given the opportunity to live forever!<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

No no no mang epie, the creation of “MANKIND was ALREADY DONE, finished already… MANKIND who are capable of sinning, just like god only god chooses not as you have mentioned (I bet according to the baybol too), with free will ….
MANKIND who are BOUND to DIE… the FLESH and BLOOD…
MANKIND who are in LIKENES with god, LIKENESS as “clearly” describe when they already know the RIGHT from WRONG…
and THAT IS MANKIND… NOT GODKIND as your UNDERSTANDING have described… NOT EVEN SPIRIT KIND…….once again MANKIND….<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Wrong. I don’t degrade anybody. Again, “according to the bible”,<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

ooohhh good mang epie that you are aware of that and you are not degrading anybody… please next time, can you refrain from quoting the old addage.. the satan addage you know… while your are using that however small it is, indirectly, you are judging the other person.. dont you think…. may I suggest maybe next time… be more human… <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Let’s reread, if you don’t mind, my comment you cited: “As to which is credible, don’t tell me you are giving room in yourself to find my posts credible to you. Far from it.”

Let’s be frank. If you are slighted by the comment, then you must admit there is that possibility that you would believe my posts. If you are not slighted, then I am right that I could never make you conform to my views.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

of course naman mang epie,,, and I am open pa naman paniwalaan si father god eh,,, pero not necessarily naniwala ako sa iyong understanding, maniniwala na ako to your god,,, there must be some other proof…

what about you mang epie, is there a chance na maniniwala ka sa UNDERSTANDING especially dito sa account ng MANKIND creation???…<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

And even if we are poles apart in belief and unbelief, I don’t blame you or look down on you or any other person who does not believe what I believe. If I look down on any such person, then I go against God who has the prerogative to whom understanding is to be given in this age.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

really good to know that, just reminding you please refrain from using the old addage of SATAN quoting the baybol….. somehow however small it is, if you use it to respond to UNBELIEVER MANKIND.. it leaves bad taste in the mouth…

and one more thing hindi ba nasagi sa isip mo na pwede rin tumama ang UNDERSTANDING ng isang lowest of the low unbeliever MANKIND sa isang BOOK ng baybol???… you might be surprised that I am ONE with father god on this…of course one in PURPOSE– in INTENSION<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I appreciate your comments mang gorio even if your intention was to disprove my points. Mang Heruino says “I had fun reading your posts and replies and I clearly understood your points”.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is really good to know that you are aware that I’m my only intension is to disprove your point, not your god… Now here is the part you might want to think about… Now that mang heruino had fun and clearly understand your point ,, didnt ever occur to you that you have now a responsibility… you have now an influence… what if you are wrong on the whole account of craetion of MANKIND… are you capable enough to admit that you are wrong??? can you be MANKIND enough to correct it???<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

So mang gorio, keep commenting on my posts. The points you raise give me opportunities to share understanding to those who are ready to understand. And if I post in English, this is so that more people can understand the discussion.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I will mang epie,,, you might have noticed that I have a lot more spare time during the week… that might not be the case next week… tapos na ang bakasyon…<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

No.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I think it should be yes… look at this joke of yours
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=112744&start=375<\/a>

see they use the same word, verbatim.. and yet they have different UNDERSTANDING.. just like your dictum- the dictum I also use in exchanging with you….

and if I may add before I logout…
now that there is no doubt I’m using the book of GENESIS in supporting my UNDERSTANDING of the whole account on MANKINDs creation, while you mang epie use different verses from different Gospel… may I now ask which is the better approach to UNDERSTAND the MANKINDS creation???… given that both understanding are based and according to the Baybol…

what do you think mang epie???

given that, in my Understanding the only difference is the suffix “-ness” while yours the word SPIRIT that is nothing you can see in Gen 1:26.

what do you think mang epie… do you think it is better to use the ” RULE of the THUMB ” in UNDERSTANDING it??..

you might noticed this is only address to you mang epie,,, but you have now the responsibilty to all your readers…weder yu lyk it or dont…

imadyo mapapansin mong mukha akong nagmamadali… theres some truth to it… tapos na bakasyon kasi… limited na ang time next week…<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Mang Heruino: <\/strong>Good day to you bro. gorio20\/20.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I read your post and believe me, I also had fun reading your replies and queries. I can sense that fervor and zealousness in you that you try to disprove bro. Epie’s understanding of his faith. In as much as I saw my name mentioned in your post in relation to that “responsibility”, I am inclined to butt-in even just for now if you may.  

Bro. Epifanio has no more responsibility on me anymore. He delivered the Word and I read. I began to understand. Now I understood. Then I accepted. I am on my own responsibility towards my God now.

So please don’t get bothered to worry about me of bro. epie’s responsibility. I am now accountable of myself between me and my God. 

Thank you for the concern, though. I appreciate it.  

Have a wonderful vacation, bro.

-MH<\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20: <\/strong>mang MH,

what makes you conclude that fervor and zealousness to mang epie is the reason why I disagree with him. Mang heruino…in fact I dont want be like him or influential like him or as respected like him (mang epie)….

dont you think you are threading the line of being judgmental??? thats not good according to baybol…s

so while having fun reading both of our view, I bet in a healthy way, which do you think is the better approach????.. 
its good that you yourself initiate to unburden the responsibility of mang epie, that is extra point for you from your god…

but let me ask this question to you…given that I use the same dictum as mang epie is using – according to the baybol dictum. and you have read our exchanges.. 
DIDNT OCCUR TO YOU THAT I ” the unbeliever MANKIND ” is CAPABLE of UNDERSTANDING the whole account af MANKINDs CREATION????

ikaw ang available eh….

sandali nalimutan ko…

BWAHAHAHAHA + BWAHAHAHAHAH – BWAHAHAHAHH = BWAHAHAHAHAH

pwede naman eh,, kasi may emoticon ka rin!!!<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Mang Heruino: <\/strong>I can see in your persistence.  

But of course if you are uncomfortable with it, you might want to disregard it entirely.

Better approach? In what purpose?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

DIDNT OCCUR TO YOU THAT I ” the unbeliever MANKIND ” is CAPABLE of UNDERSTANDING the whole account af MANKINDs CREATION????<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

What particular creation is that, the divine one?

And this one is cool, may I borrow it?
BWAHAHAHAHA + BWAHAHAHAHAH – BWAHAHAHAHH = BWAHAHAHAHAH<\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20: <\/strong>Mang Heruino wrote:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I can see in your persistence.  <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

actually there some truth to it and most most part is… ilang bese kasi akong na-taymawt… noong sumasagot sa poste ni mang epie..hehehehe<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Mang Heruino wrote:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

But of course if you are uncomfortable with it, you might want to disregard it entirely.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

yep ay em un-comportabol in grammar…<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Mang Heruino wrote:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Better approach? In what purpose?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

You said you have read it? is it ok if you read it again from the start i commented to mang epies post?
can you rephrase the ” In what purpose ?” part?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Mang Heruino wrote:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

What particular creation is that, the divine one?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

yep, you may call it devine, but I’m not sure if its is according to the baybol<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Mang Heruino wrote:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

And this one is cool, may I borrow it?
BWAHAHAHAHA + BWAHAHAHAHAH – BWAHAHAHAHH = BWAHAHAHAHAH<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

for me ,yes you may… you might also ask mang lifey for his permission… he is the one who requested that from me?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

BWAHAHHAHHA + BWAHAHAHAHA – BWAHAHAHAHA = BWAHAAHAHAHA

matanong kita mang MH… anong dating handol mo?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Mang Heruino: <\/strong>This is my first ever handol, bro.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

yep, you may call it devine, but I’m not sure if its is according to the baybol<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Actually, elementary public school Science textbooks call it the Divine Theory (Grade Six). If yes, then my follow-up question is, do you think that your “Understanding” of the creation (Devine Theory) will lead to your believing? What I am saying is if that UNDERSTANDING equals BELIEVING.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

so while having fun reading both of our view, I bet in a healthy way, which do you think is the better approach?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Approach for what purpose, I asked. If you are talking about better approach in making believers turn off their beliefs or the other way? Also if you are talking about effectiveness of relying the message to the readers (believer or not). I’d like to know the “approach” in what purpose. So if you want to tell me, what is your purpose then in doing this approach?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

actually there some truth to it and most most part is… ilang bese kasi akong na-taymawt… noong sumasagot sa poste ni mang epie..hehehehe<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bingo.  

I like this equation, really:
BWAHAHHAHHA + BWAHAHAHAHA – BWAHAHAHAHA = BWAHAAHAHAHA<\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA: <\/strong>gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

not at all mang epie, it doesnt bother me at all. I just want to remind you that you might step out of bound. You might end up thinking playing TEYNIS but in reality your playing my game… and so far if you may have noticed by now, I have set aside my game….di ba…. and as much as possible I want to address it to you ONLY, so I will not be ACCOUNTABLE to other person here in this forum if he\/she happen ed to UNDERSTOOD my point…<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ok, so emoticons should not be problems. To digress a little anyway you mentioned it, a tennis player could not be cited for stepping out of bound. To the contrary, if he steps inside the bound while doing the serve, he’ll be penalized for a foot fault.

I appreciate your concern on responsibility. I am aware of my responsibility if I cause a babe in Christ to be led to a falsity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Matthew 18:6 \u201cWhoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to sin, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were drowned in the depth of the sea. <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

just like I have mentioned above others didnt agree with that, the Jew doesnt recognized the NT and you know that…. AND THEY HAVE VERY GOOD REASON for that… example. YOU HAVE CONCLUDED THAT Dyesus HAVE HIS OWN MIND as you say. You even supported it with verse – A VERSE FROM NT- quoting Dyesus saying Father is greater than him…. and here is the most intriguing so far,.. only from our exchanges of view… in Gen 1:26 there is NO word SPIRIT there, and yet to support your “UNDERSTANDING” that MANKIND is still in the process of creation there is a word SPIRIT… didnt ever occur to you that there is some BAWAS\/DAG-DAG there?… one more thing didnt ever to you that Dyesus was only misQUOTED by the Apostle, and some of NT are just retelling of story, are not close to the truth… look at the CREDIBILTY of those apostle mang epie… even in a court of law in which I believe close to you will concluded that those APOSTLE are NOT CREDIBLE… … and just like what I have said, the Jew have a GOOD REASON to disagree with the NT…<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I agree that majority of the Jews don’t recognize the NT. The Jews of Jesus’ day didn’t accept Christ as having been in existence already during the time of Abraham and they even attempted to stone Jesus for claiming so. But the first Christians were Jews like the disciples and many others cited in Acts 2.
There are some portions of the verses in Mark, 1 John 5:7-8, others, which have been added and should not be in the NT. The bible student should be aware of these and are advised to read versions with footnotes and disregard the passage pointed out. 

Overall, I rely on the credibility of the NT. The “GOOD REASON to disagree with the NT” by a Jew is, from my point of view, that he has not been called yet to become a disciple or student of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

No no no mang epie, the creation of “MANKIND was ALREADY DONE, finished already… MANKIND who are capable of sinning, just like god only god chooses not as you have mentioned (I bet according to the baybol too), with free will ….
MANKIND who are BOUND to DIE… the FLESH and BLOOD…
MANKIND who are in LIKENES with god, LIKENESS as “clearly” describe when they already capable to know RIGHT from WRONG…
and THAT IS MANKIND… NOT GODKIND as your UNDERSTANDING have described… NOT EVEN SPIRIT KIND…….once again MANKIND….<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

We can agree to disagree on this one mang gorio. You say the creation of man is finished. I say, not yet.\u00a0

To be finished, man still needs to be changed to spirit. I’ll cite an OT verse where Job says he awaits his change from his grave.

Job 14:14 If a man dies, shall he live again?All the days of my hard service I will wait, Till my change comes.

Paul, inspired by Christ, emphasizes a change and assures Christians that “we shall be changed”.

1 Corinthians 15:51 Behold, I tell you a mystery: We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed\u2014 52 in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.\u00a0

There is a need for a change to spirit because man’s present unfinished state is that he is still corruptible and mortal. To be like God he needs to put on incorruption and immortality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1 Corinthians 15:53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For those who say they believe the bible but still believe that there is an immortal soul in a person, he needs to be pointed out to the bible teaching that the soul is mortal and that of all men, only Jesus had that immortality (with the exception of his temporarily shedding it off for the purpose of death for 3 days).

Ezekiel 18:4, 20 The soul who sins shall die. 

1 Timothy 6:15 which He will manifest in His own time, He who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings and Lord of lords, 16 who alone has immortality…<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

ooohhh good mang epie that you are aware of that and you are not degrading anybody… please next time, can you refrain from quoting the old addage.. the satan addage you know… while your are using that however small it is, indirectly, you are judging the other person.. dont you think…. may I suggest maybe next time… be more human…<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Suggestion well taken mang gorio. At first I thought I should not be citing Satan using scriptures. But having in mind that you also don’t believe Satan, I thought you won’t be affected. <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

of course naman mang epie,,, and I am open pa naman paniwalaan si father god eh,,, pero not necessarily naniwala ako sa iyong understanding, maniniwala na ako to your god,,, there must be some other proof…<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

That’s a surprise to me mang gorio. All the while I thought you don’t believe in the existence of God, Satan, angels, they being only like Santa Claus, mickey mouse, batman, superman…etc.

I can’t produce the proof you want. Just tell me if I’m right with this one. You don’t recognize the NT, just like the Jews. If so, then, just like the Jews, you can’t accept the gospel. The veil remains.

2 Corinthians 3:12 Therefore, since we have such hope, we use great boldness of speech\u2014 13 unlike Moses, who put a veil over his face so that the children of Israel could not look steadily at the end of what was passing away. 14 But their minds were blinded. For until this day the same veil remains unlifted in the reading of the Old Testament, because the veil is taken away in Christ. 15 But even to this day, when Moses is read, a veil lies on their heart.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is only when one becomes a Christian (Romans 8:9) when the veil is taken away.

2 Corinthians 3:16 Nevertheless when one turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

what about you mang epie, is there a chance na maniniwala ka sa AKING UNDERSTANDING especially dito sa account ng MANKIND creation???…<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I have been in your position before. I can’t go back mang gorio.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

really good to know that, just reminding you please refrain from using the old addage of SATAN quoting the baybol….. somehow however small it is, if you use it to respond to UNBELIEVER MANKIND.. it leaves bad taste in the mouth…<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ok. I really had in mind that “to UNBELIEVER MANKIND”, it won’t bother them Satan being non-existent to them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

and one more thing hindi ba nasagi sa isip mo na pwede rin tumama ang UNDERSTANDING ng isang lowest of the low unbeliever MANKIND sa isang BOOK ng baybol???… you might be surprised that I am ONE with father god on this…of course one in PURPOSE– in INTENSION<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Understanding has degrees. At the start, one understands a little. Then a little more. 

As I said, I’ve been in your position before. If, really, a “lowest of the low unbeliever MANKIND” has “UNDERSTANDING” of a book of the bible (“sa isang BOOK ng baybol”), his being an “unbeliever” becomes shaky.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is really good to know that you are aware that I’m my only intension is to disprove your point, not your god… Now here is the part you might want to think about… Now that mang heruino had fun and clearly understand your point ,, didnt ever occur to you that you have now a responsibility… you have now an influence… what if you are wrong on the whole account of craetion of MANKIND… are you capable enough to admit that you are wrong??? can you be MANKIND enough to correct it???<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

God is in control mang gorio. If I’m wrong, he’ll either correct me or cause the reader of my posts not to believe me. When corrected, of course I’ll admit I’m wrong and move on to grow in understanding.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I will mang epie,,, you might have noticed that I have a lot more spare time during the week… that might not be the case next week… tapos na ang bakasyon…<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Thanks. Frankly, I’ve gained improved understanding of the bible because I discussed with bible bashers like Tony, wholesale, dd44, etc. which are recorded in the old threads. They raise points which are not raised by my fellows.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I think it should be yes… look at this joke of yours
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=112744&start=375

see they use the same word, verbatim.. and yet they have different UNDERSTANDING.. just like your dictum- the dictum I also use in exchanging with you….<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The joke is not mine but zorro’s mang gorio.

In the Church of God, and I’m referring to those who have the Holy Spirit of God wherever they maybe in all nations, understanding varies in degree because of various factors. But one thing is sure. God appoints “some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers” to equip the saints (saints in the bible are those in whom the Holy Spirit of God dwells). Eventually there will be “unity of the faith and of the knowledge (“UNDERSTANDING”) of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ” in the Church of God.

Ephesians 4:11 And He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers, 12 for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, 13 till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ…<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

and if I may add before I logout…

now that there is no doubt I’m using the book of GENESIS in supporting my UNDERSTANDING of the whole account on MANKINDs creation, while you mang epie use different verses from different Gospel… may I now ask which is the better approach to UNDERSTAND the MANKINDS creation???… given that both understanding are based and according to the Baybol…

what do you think mang epie???

given that, in my Understanding the only difference is the suffix “-ness” while yours the word SPIRIT that is nothing you can see in Gen 1:26.
what do you think mang epie… do you think it is better to use the ” RULE of the THUMB ” in UNDERSTANDING it??..<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

If I want to understand what a book really says, I’ll read the whole book and not one chapter only and disregard the other chapters. In the case of the bible, it is one bible composed of 70 books (there are 5 books of Psalms). I have to read all the books.

But I have to emphasize that the bible is different from all other books. It is not just any book. Reading the bible is not enough. Anybody can read the bible but not anybody can understand it. Understanding has to be opened by God.

In the book of Acts, an Ethoipian Eunuch read Isaiah but couldn’t understand what he was reading although he knows how to read and could understand ordinary books. God sent to him Philip to help him understand.

Acts 8:26 Now an angel of the Lord spoke to Philip, saying, \u201cArise and go toward the south along the road which goes down from Jerusalem to Gaza.\u201d This is desert. 27 So he arose and went. And behold, a man of Ethiopia, a eunuch of great authority under Candace the queen of the Ethiopians, who had charge of all her treasury, and had come to Jerusalem to worship, 28 was returning. And sitting in his chariot, he was reading Isaiah the prophet. 29 Then the Spirit said to Philip, \u201cGo near and overtake this chariot.\u201d 
30 So Philip ran to him, and heard him reading the prophet Isaiah, and said, \u201cDo you understand what you are reading?\u201d 
31 And he said, \u201cHow can I, unless someone guides me?\u201d 

The first step to understanding what is being read in the bible is acceptance by one that he needs guidance by those who have been given understanding ahead. 

Acts 8:31…And he asked Philip to come up and sit with him. 32 The place in the Scripture which he read was this: 
\u201cHe was led as a sheep to the slaughter;
And as a lamb before its shearer is silent,
So He opened not His mouth.
33 In His humiliation His justice was taken away,
And who will declare His generation?
For His life is taken from the earth.\u201d
34 So the eunuch answered Philip and said, \u201cI ask you, of whom does the prophet say this, of himself or of some other man?\u201d 35 Then Philip opened his mouth, and beginning at this Scripture, preached Jesus to him. 

To “comprehend the scriptures”, Jesus has to open one’s understanding.

Luke 24:44 Then He said to them, \u201cThese are the words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms concerning Me.\u201d 45 And He opened their understanding, that they might comprehend the Scriptures. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

you might noticed this is only address to you mang epie,,, but you have now the responsibilty to all your readers…weder yu lyk it or dont…<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I am aware of my, and I will assume full, responsibility mang gorio.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

imadyo mapapansin mong mukha akong nagmamadali… theres some truth to it… tapos na bakasyon kasi… limited na ang time next week…<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Take it easy but responsibly mang gorio.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20: <\/strong>mang epie,

Basahin ko muna yoong sagot mo at nang hindi ako ma-tay-out na naman….

Ahhhh, mang Epie, matanong ko la^ang, 
why you brought out the TEYNIS part???<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA: <\/strong>It was in parenthesis. No other reason except that I was going to log off at that point because it was time for me to play tennis for exercise. Like today, in 30 minutes, I’ll be playing tennis. I mentioned it to let you know, while we were exchanging posts, that when I no longer respond to your post, it is because I was already playing tennis.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20: <\/strong>ahh ok… ok mang epie akala ko kasi you are teasing me eh..kahit konte eh… at you are refering to our previous exchanges from the other thread about referee at tennis topic… at saka may emoticon kasi.. tapos.. naalala mo rin yoong mga marvel komiks na nabanggit ko dati…

good luck, I will play basketball too after sagotin yoong post most last week…<\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20:<\/strong> Before anything else let me say these, ( I don\u2019t want you to have an impressionna nag-mamarunong ako kaya tatag-lishin ko mang epie)
Ang credibilidad ng isang religious institusyon ay nagiging QUESTYONABLE sa oras na IDEPENSA nila ang kanilang institusyon sa halip na young kabutihan purpose ng God\u2026 totoo din yan sa isang Christian individual\u2026 totoo din yan sa mga sayentipiko..<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ok, so emoticons should not be problems. To digress a little anyway you mentioned it, a tennis player could not be cited for stepping out of bound. To the contrary, if he steps inside the bound while doing the serve, he’ll be penalized for a foot fault.

I appreciate your concern on responsibility. I am aware of my responsibility if I cause a babe in Christ to be led to a falsity.

Matthew 18:6 \u201cWhoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to sin, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were drowned in the depth of the sea. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is really good to know that you are aware of your RESPONSIBILITY here Mang Epie, especially now that I can say your influence is somehow evident. It is also really good to know that it is stated in the baybol. 
And let see if WE (YOU and ME) really grasp the meaning of RESPONSIBILITY\u2026.
But first let me tell you my PURPOSE here. ..Before I decided to post in your thread, I already have these in mind. I will arrange it according to its importance.
1) I will not even try to disprove your god\u2019s existence, the father god that is.
2) I will only prove that YOUR UNDERSTANDING to a particular topic which is the \u201cCREATION of MANKIND\u201d is wrong and I will use the baybol to support it. According to your dictum.
3) To make it clear each of our (you and me) responsibility, ang responsibilidad mo at sa akin at how it deiffer\u2026 without offending YOU\u2026 kaya mag-tataglish ako\u2026 ok lang naman siguro diba\u2026 
4) promise mange pie, I\u2019m not here para pumuntos lang na kagaya ng mya abogado sa korte. – Na Kahit alam na guilty young pinagtatanggol nya, ang intension lang ay i-save young kliyente nya and sad to say not even necessarily the truth\u2026

Come to think of it mang epie,
Kung makukumbinsi kita na MAS TAMA young UNDERSTANDING ko sa whole process of creation of mankind\u2026 I can say na I will still remain UNBELIEVER.
To tell you honestly mange pie.. I have nothing to gain here\u2026 If your understanding is the right one and mine is wrong.. good for you and to those you have influenced with\u2026 theres a lot of them I know.
Ang nakakatakot (sayong part) ay kung may mas \u201cBETTER UNDERSTANDING\u201d kumpara sa iyong understanding and you keep on insisting and not abandoning it\u2026. tapos naging defiant ka!! (hopefully it will not happen)\u2026.. that\u2019s the danger of it\u2026

With all these reasons, I think I am one with god.. my Intension is the same with father god..just like dyesus right??? Even for the single SUBJECT.. the CREATION of MANKIND\u2026

Now let me go back to the responsibility part—- 
Don\u2019t you think it is a LITTLE BIT IRRESPONSIBLE if let us say, the question is ABSOLUTE and yet you didn\u2019t answer it in an ABSOLUTE way?\u2026 ang ibig kong sabihin ay halimbawa\u2026 ang tanong ay masasagot naman ng YES or NO\u2026 tapos hindi sinagot ng according sa nature ng tanong o kaya ay may pakuli-kuli\u2026 hope you agree with me on these mange pie\u2026
Isa pang magandang rason upang sagutin ang isang ABSOLUTE QUESTION\u2026
I believe that you are seeking for the truth , right mang Epie?
What if the truth is exactly the opposite of your understanding? And make you realized that everything na young mga NAIINTINDIHAN MO before ay mali pala? Are you willing to abandon your understanding, of course responsibly???\u2026

SO I have to ask you again, 
Can you tell me please, 
Do you think there is a POSSIBILTY that ME \u201cthe UNBELIEVER\u201d or the people like me is CAPABLE of \u201c UNDERSTANDING\u201d even a single SUBJECT (like the CREATION of MANKIND) better than YOU mang Epie?

And I can say the question above is one good example of an ABSOLUTE question\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I agree that majority of the Jews don’t recognize the NT. The Jews of Jesus’ day didn’t accept Christ as having been in existence already during the time of Abraham and they even attempted to stone Jesus for claiming so. But the first Christians were Jews like the disciples and many others cited in Acts 2.

There are some portions of the verses in Mark, 1 John 5:7-8, others, which have been added and should not be in the NT. The bible student should be aware of these and are advised to read versions with footnotes and disregard the passage pointed out. 

Overall, I rely on the credibility of the NT. The “GOOD REASON to disagree with the NT” by a Jew is, from my point of view, that he has not been called yet to become a disciple or student of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I think mang Epie you missed the point here. In OT, Gen 1:26 was well explained and supported by the BOOK of GENISIS alone and without any DAGDAG-BAWAS as compare to the support on NT\u2026 Unless NT is a CORRECTION of OT…<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

We can agree to disagree on this one mang gorio. You say the creation of man is finished. I say, not yet.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I think mang epie, It not a good idea to settle this to \u201c we can agree to disagree on this one \u201c , because we want to prove the truth right? If we are just going to do this, we are just pleasing ourselves\u2026 And we are being IRresposible if we do that\u2026 don\u2019t you think\u2026??? both of our UNDERSTANDING are based from the baybol and yet opposite<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

To be finished, man still needs to be changed to spirit. I’ll cite an OT verse where Job says he awaits his change from his grave.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

No mang Epie, its very clear. In just ONE book, MANKIND CREATION was already explained and it would NOT be na \u201cMANKIND\u201d anymore, it would be SPIRITKIND or GODKIND\u2026
Unless kung sinabi nga talaga ni dyesus young verse na may SPIRIT pa\u2026 ang KASO LALABAS NA KINOREK nya si father god at umiral ang pag-SPEAK nya ng his OWN MIND\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Job 14:14 If a man dies, shall he live again?All the days of my hard service I will wait, Till my change comes.

Paul, inspired by Christ, emphasizes a change and assures Christians that “we shall be changed”.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

NO Mang Epie, nag concentrate ka kasi at E-ni-QUATE mo kaagad young sinabi sa GEN 1:26 LIKENESS in GOD sa PERFECTION EH\u2026. Walang sinabing SPIRIT DOON mang Epie\u2026
I\u2019m SURE mang Epie hindi pa GODLIKE young UNDERSTANDING ko, and I\u2019m SURE HINDI mo rin aaminin na GODLIKE na young UNDERSTANDING mo\u2026.so ang tanong talaga..
Which UNDERSTANDING is better, between yours or mine?
Keeping in mind that you already have a responsibility to other readers\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

1 Corinthians 15:51 Behold, I tell you a mystery: We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed\u2014 52 in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. 

There is a need for a change to spirit because man’s present unfinished state is that he is still corruptible and mortal. To be like God he needs to put on incorruption and immortality.

1 Corinthians 15:53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Creation of MANKIND is already done mang Epie, KAYA NGA MANKIND EH\u2026 capable of sinning capable of knowing what is RIGHT from WRONG\u2026 that the requirement according to the BOOK OF GENESIS\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Believing and UNDERSTANDING is very different, would you agree mang Epie? And so far I can say that I am on the UNDERSTANDING stage only especially on the topic of CREATION of MANKING\u2026<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ezekiel 18:4, 20 The soul who sins shall die. <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

What is the difference between soul and SPIRIT?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Suggestion well taken mang gorio. At first I thought I should not be citing Satan using scriptures. But having in mind that you also don’t believe Satan, I thought you won’t be affected. <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Honestly mang Epie, I don\u2019t mind it. Because I know you are responsible as you say. But here is the thing\u2026mang Epie\u2026..
Would you agree with me that – there is a BIG difference if that addage was used by a Christian towards the UNBELIEVER \u2026 and if it was used by the UNBELIEVER towards christian\u2026

I can say there is right???\u2026 the first has some \u201c hostility \u201c from your part while the other is only a \u201cJOKE\u201d.. do you see what I mean , mange pie? 
Minsan kasi mange pie, young small responsibility nakakalimutan natin\u2026 nangyayari din yaan sa akin\u2026
Ang kagandahan lang sa akin parte, being \u201cUNBELIEVER\u201d , habang walang naniniwala sa akin, mas lalong nababawasan ang aking responsibilidad.
Kahit nga young mga \u201cetheist\u201d, dito kung may na-impluwensyahan man ako (which I doubt), masasabi kong wala pa rin akong responsibilidad sa kanila. Kasi dati na silang \u201cUNBELIEVER\u201d eh\u2026 sounds unfair diba!!! I have nothing to gain and I have nothing to lose too\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

That’s a surprise to me mang gorio. All the while I thought you don’t believe in the existence of God, Satan, angels, they being only like Santa Claus, mickey mouse, batman, superman…etc.
————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I really believe that there is no true atheist mang Epie, I do not even consider myself as one, if you have read some of my post on the other thread. ME, I just only NEED BETTER PROOF\u2026 
————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I can’t produce the proof you want. Just tell me if I’m right with this one. You don’t recognize the NT, just like the Jews. If so, then, just like the Jews, you can’t accept the gospel. The veil remains.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

And I don\u2019t even have a plan to ask you for a proof, like the proof that I am asking from other character here in pacland, because I know you are not the right entity\/person to ask that type of question\u2026<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

2 Corinthians 3:12 Therefore, since we have such hope, we use great boldness of speech\u2014 13 unlike Moses, who put a veil over his face so that the children of Israel could not look steadily at the end of what was passing away. 14 But their minds were blinded. For until this day the same veil remains unlifted in the reading of the Old Testament, because the veil is taken away in Christ. 15 But even to this day, when Moses is read, a veil lies on their heart.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

For this particular topic\/subject of MAKIND CREATION mang Epie, I\u2019m not sure WHO IS BLINDED in mind\u2026mang Epie\u2026 I will not gain anything here even if I can prove to you that your understanding is wrong\u2026<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is only when one becomes a Christian (Romans 8:9) when the veil is taken away.

2 Corinthians 3:16 Nevertheless when one turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

From the past there are many UNBELIEVER that were proven RIGHT in their understanding. That is why many Christian establishment accept the idea that through science, god revealed himself. <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I have been in your position before. I can’t go back mang gorio.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Mang Epie, let me be clear, I am not asking you to be like me ( baka kasi iyan ang nasa-isip mo eh\u2026). I am just asking you if kung aayon ka sa aking UNDERSTANDING ng CREATION of MANKING\u2026 for this particular topic alone..<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Understanding has degrees. At the start, one understands a little. Then a little more. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

So you have been to that process and from that kind of reasoning it seems, you are expecting the same way should happen for me\u2026 understanding little by little \u2013 and you are away ahead of me\u2026is that it Mang epie??.. I just want to clarify this\u2026<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As I said, I’ve been in your position before. If, really, a “lowest of the low unbeliever MANKIND” has “UNDERSTANDING” of a book of the bible (“sa isang BOOK ng baybol”), his being an “unbeliever” becomes shaky.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Shaky you may say, pero, between our UNDERSTANDINGs \u2013 CREATION of MANKIND STILL in PROGRESS against CREATION of MANKIND ALREADY DONE \u2013 
both are according to the baybol, 
mine \u2013 I only use one book to support it, in a chronological way
while yours \u2013 from one apostle to another, from back to front and given the credibility of the apostle we can say that they are SINUNGALIN\u2026 malay mo na MISQUOTE lang ng mga apostle si dyesus\u2026

*and now let me ask you this question again \u2013 and I can definitely say that it is a good example of a ABSOLUTE question that needs ABSOLUTE answer\u2026

IS THERE A POSSIBILITY THAT AN \u201c UNBELIEVER LIKE ME\u201d COULD UNDERSTAND THE WHOLE PROCESS OF MANKIND CREATION better than YOU, mang Epie?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

God is in control mang gorio. If I’m wrong, he’ll either correct me or cause the reader of my posts not to believe me. When corrected, of course I’ll admit I’m wrong and move on to grow in understanding.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

How do you think he is going to correct you? Pwede kayang manggaling sa UNBELIEVER young correction na yoon?… Sa tingin mo sa ANONG paraan ka pwedeng i-CORRECT ni father god?.. you might end up asking the same proof as I do if you will not even give any consideration that MY UNDERSTANDING is MORE CLOSER to what the Gen 1:26 is saying.. dib a mange pie???<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Thanks. Frankly, I’ve gained improved understanding of the bible because I discussed with bible bashers like Tony, wholesale, dd44, etc. which are recorded in the old threads. They raise points which are not raised by my fellows.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

But your target your are the believers right mange pie, don\u2019t you think those basher are part of the whole scheme.. so what does these tells you??<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The joke is not mine but zorro’s mang gorio.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ay sorry mange pie, mukhang hindi ko nilinaw young joke na gusto kong tingnan mo\u2026 ito yoon mange pie:
Texted by a friend

Before marriage:

He: Yes. At last. It was so hard to wait. 

She: Do you want me to leave?

He: No! Don’t even think about it.

She: Do you love me?

He: Of course! Over and over!

She: Have you ever cheated on me?

He: No! Why are you even asking?

She: Will you kiss me?

He: Every chance I get.

She: Will you hit me?

He: Are you crazy? I’m not that kind of person!

She: Can I trust you?

He: Yes.

She: Darling!

After marriage…..simply read from bottom to top.

Iyan mange pi, tingnan mo, kapag binasa ng from top to bottom \u2013 ANG resulta at ang ibig ipahiwatig ay kakaiba kapag binasa ng PABALIGTAD, bottom to the top \u2013 
So between our two different UNDERSTANDING, both are according to the baybol, sino ang mas-closer sa GUSTONG ipahiwatig???… isa pa!!! dyan mo makikita ang flaws sa ACCORDING to the BIBLE that you are keep on saying\u2026

now my question again

dont you think that the ” according to the bible” dictum of yours are flawed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

If I want to understand what a book really says, I’ll read the whole book and not one chapter only and disregard the other chapters. In the case of the bible, it is one bible composed of 70 books (there are 5 books of Psalms). I have to read all the books.

But I have to emphasize that the bible is different from all other books. It is not just any book. Reading the bible is not enough. Anybody can read the bible but not anybody can understand it. Understanding has to be opened by God.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

So do you mean between BELIEVERS and UNBELIEVERs, ALWAYS young BELIEVER ang NA-AAYON SA GOD at YOONG SA UNBELIEVER ay hindi NAAYON???<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the book of Acts, an Ethiopian Eunuch read Isaiah but couldn’t understand what he was reading although he knows how to read and could understand ordinary books. God sent to him Philip to help him understand.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Hindi ba nasagi sa isip mo mang epie na, maybe.. me the \u201cUNBELIEVER\u201d ay gumaganap ng papel ni Philip this time, kahit dito lang sa SUBJECT na CREATION of MANKIND??<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I am aware of my, and I will assume full, responsibility mang gorio.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Just bear in mind mange pie, kung kalian mo dapat ihiwalay ang iyong sarili sa iyong \u201cUNDERSTANDING\u201d ng baybol….. and I hope in my post I have shown that I’m doing it…<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Take it easy but responsibly mang gorio.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Yes mang Epie , I will\u2026 and so far I think I have a good understanding of my situation and my RESPONSIBILITY being \u201c UNBELIEVER\u201d — the more na walang naniniwala sa akin mange pie\u2026 THE BETTER for me\u2026walang halong biro<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA: <\/strong>gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Before anything else let me say these, ( I don\u2019t want you to have an impressionna nag-mamarunong ako kaya tatag-lishin ko mang epie)<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

No problem mang gorio. But I’ll respond in simple English so that the non-tagalog speakers could understand. Anyway, you can understand me.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ang credibilidad ng isang religious institusyon ay nagiging QUESTYONABLE sa oras na IDEPENSA nila ang kanilang institusyon sa halip na young kabutihan purpose ng God\u2026 totoo din yan sa isang Christian individual\u2026 totoo din yan sa mga sayentipiko..<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Defense as in justify mang gorio?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is really good to know that you are aware of your RESPONSIBILITY here Mang Epie, especially now that I can say your influence is somehow evident. It is also really good to know that it is stated in the baybol. 
And let see if WE (YOU and ME) really grasp the meaning of RESPONSIBILITY\u2026.
But first let me tell you my PURPOSE here. ..Before I decided to post in your thread, I already have these in mind. I will arrange it according to its importance.
1) I will not even try to disprove your god\u2019s existence, the father god that is.
2) I will only prove that YOUR UNDERSTANDING to a particular topic which is the \u201cCREATION of MANKIND\u201d is wrong and I will use the baybol to support it. According to your dictum.
3) To make it clear each of our (you and me) responsibility, ang responsibilidad mo at sa akin at how it deiffer\u2026 without offending YOU\u2026 kaya mag-tataglish ako\u2026 ok lang naman siguro diba\u2026 
4) promise mange pie, I\u2019m not here para pumuntos lang na kagaya ng mya abogado sa korte. – Na Kahit alam na guilty young pinagtatanggol nya, ang intension lang ay i-save young kliyente nya and sad to say not even necessarily the truth\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

First, by not trying to disprove my Father God’s existence, are you saying He exists?

The duty of a lawyer whose client really committed the crime is not to do illegal means to keep him from getting convicted but to protect whatever rights he has and he does have rights. The lawyer is to support and uphold the proper administration of justice.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Come to think of it mang epie,
Kung makukumbinsi kita na MAS TAMA young UNDERSTANDING ko sa whole process of creation of mankind\u2026 I can say na I will still remain UNBELIEVER.
To tell you honestly mange pie.. I have nothing to gain here\u2026 If your understanding is the right one and mine is wrong.. good for you and to those you have influenced with\u2026 theres a lot of them I know.
Ang nakakatakot (sayong part) ay kung may mas \u201cBETTER UNDERSTANDING\u201d kumpara sa iyong understanding and you keep on insisting and not abandoning it\u2026. tapos naging defiant ka!! (hopefully it will not happen)\u2026.. that\u2019s the danger of it\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I welcome anybody to discuss the bible with me and prove me wrong. The bible says to prove or “test all things” and this does not exclude my present understanding. To be proven wrong means a better understanding.

1 Thessalonians 5:21 Test all things; hold fast what is good.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

With all these reasons, I think I am one with god.. my Intension is the same with father god..just like dyesus right??? Even for the single SUBJECT.. the CREATION of MANKIND\u2026<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Man’s creation is a good and timely topic to discuss because I have yet to meet a Christian who shares my understanding 100%. What I’m saying is that the gospel or the good news of the kingdom is really focused, not on salvation, but on man’s creation.

I hope bible believers would join the discussion.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Now let me go back to the responsibility part—- 
Don\u2019t you think it is a LITTLE BIT IRRESPONSIBLE if let us say, the question is ABSOLUTE and yet you didn\u2019t answer it in an ABSOLUTE way?\u2026 ang ibig kong sabihin ay halimbawa\u2026 ang tanong ay masasagot naman ng YES or NO\u2026 tapos hindi sinagot ng according sa nature ng tanong o kaya ay may pakuli-kuli\u2026 hope you agree with me on these mange pie\u2026
Isa pang magandang rason upang sagutin ang isang ABSOLUTE QUESTION\u2026
I believe that you are seeking for the truth , right mang Epie?
What if the truth is exactly the opposite of your understanding? And make you realized that everything na young mga NAIINTINDIHAN MO before ay mali pala? Are you willing to abandon your understanding, of course responsibly???\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Christian, in whom the “Truth” (Jesus Christ) dwells, will be led to the truth and not to lies.

I have to repeat my position on the bible that while it is composed of 70 books written by different different people at different times, is really authored by God alone. The verses of the bible are complementary one of the other. So, a verse can clarify one which appears to the reader as difficult to understand. The bible verses are one in this foremost theme – God is making man in his image according to his likeness.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There are questions where a yes or no answer is not enough.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

SO I have to ask you again, 
Can you tell me please, 
Do you think there is a POSSIBILTY that ME \u201cthe UNBELIEVER\u201d or the people like me is CAPABLE of \u201c UNDERSTANDING\u201d even a single SUBJECT (like the CREATION of MANKIND) better than YOU mang Epie?

And I can say the question above is one good example of an ABSOLUTE question\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

No.

Don’t mind my following explanation mang gorio as this is addressed to bible believers. It is God who opens understanding to comprehend the Scriptures. 

Luke 24:45 And He opened their understanding, that they might comprehend the Scriptures.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I think mang Epie you missed the point here. In OT, Gen 1:26 was well explained and supported by the BOOK of GENISIS alone and without any DAGDAG-BAWAS as compare to the support on NT\u2026 Unless NT is a CORRECTION of OT…<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

To my view the point at issue is that to you, man’s creation was finished in Gen. 1:26. Mine is that it is only the physical aspect which was over in the overall creation process.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I think mang epie, It not a good idea to settle this to \u201c we can agree to disagree on this one \u201c , because we want to prove the truth right? If we are just going to do this, we are just pleasing ourselves\u2026 And we are being IRresposible if we do that\u2026 don\u2019t you think\u2026??? both of our UNDERSTANDING are based from the baybol and yet opposite<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Really? I proposed the “we can agree to disagree” because you don’t accept NT verses. Unless we have common bases, we will never meet.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

No mang Epie, its very clear. In just ONE book, MANKIND CREATION was already explained and it would NOT be na \u201cMANKIND\u201d anymore, it would be SPIRITKIND or GODKIND\u2026
Unless kung sinabi nga talaga ni dyesus young verse na may SPIRIT pa\u2026 ang KASO LALABAS NA KINOREK nya si father god at umiral ang pag-SPEAK nya ng his OWN MIND\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

There is no quarrel that God made mankind. But this mankind he intended to be “in his image according to his likeness” (Gen. 1:26) was not yet a spirit in the likeness of God who is Spirit. 

One more thing. To say that “ang KASO LALABAS NA KINOREK nya (Jesus) si father god” is incorrect. The being who spoke in Genesis is not the Father but the being, YHWH, who became Jesus Christ. Again, if you reject the NT, you would not understand this truth. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

NO Mang Epie, nag concentrate ka kasi at E-ni-QUATE mo kaagad young sinabi sa GEN 1:26 LIKENESS in GOD sa PERFECTION EH\u2026. Walang sinabing SPIRIT DOON mang Epie\u2026
I\u2019m SURE mang Epie hindi pa GODLIKE young UNDERSTANDING ko, and I\u2019m SURE HINDI mo rin aaminin na GODLIKE na young UNDERSTANDING mo\u2026.so ang tanong talaga..
Which UNDERSTANDING is better, between yours or mine?
Keeping in mind that you already have a responsibility to other readers\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I’m aware of my responsibility mang gorio. Even if there is no word “spirit” in Gen. 1:26, it has to come into the picture because God is Spirit and he was making man to be like him, Spirit. “..according to our likeness”. As at Gen. 1:26, Adam was hardly a spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Creation of MANKIND is already done mang Epie, KAYA NGA MANKIND EH\u2026 capable of sinning capable of knowing what is RIGHT from WRONG\u2026 that the requirement according to the BOOK OF GENESIS\u2026<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The mankind which is intended to be in God’s likeness of being immortal, incorruptible, does not sin, mankind is still a long way off mang gorio.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Believing and UNDERSTANDING is very different, would you agree mang Epie? And so far I can say that I am on the UNDERSTANDING stage only especially on the topic of CREATION of MANKING\u2026<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

We agree in the difference. But as to the order, it is believe first and then understand. And then understand some more. And much more.

Isaiah 43:10 \u201cYou are My witnesses,\u201d says the LORD, \u201cAnd My servant whom I have chosen, That you may know and believe Me, And understand that I am He.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What is the difference between soul and SPIRIT?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Soul is the man himself which includes a spirit (breath) in him.

Job 32:8 But there is a spirit in man, And the breath of the Almighty gives him understanding.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Honestly mang Epie, I don\u2019t mind it. Because I know you are responsible as you say. But here is the thing\u2026mang Epie\u2026..
Would you agree with me that – there is a BIG difference if that addage was used by a Christian towards the UNBELIEVER \u2026 and if it was used by the UNBELIEVER towards christian\u2026

I can say there is right???\u2026 the first has some \u201c hostility \u201c from your part while the other is only a \u201cJOKE\u201d.. do you see what I mean , mange pie? 
Minsan kasi mange pie, young small responsibility nakakalimutan natin\u2026 nangyayari din yaan sa akin\u2026
Ang kagandahan lang sa akin parte, being \u201cUNBELIEVER\u201d , habang walang naniniwala sa akin, mas lalong nababawasan ang aking responsibilidad.
Kahit nga young mga \u201cetheist\u201d, dito kung may na-impluwensyahan man ako (which I doubt), masasabi kong wala pa rin akong responsibilidad sa kanila. Kasi dati na silang \u201cUNBELIEVER\u201d eh\u2026 sounds unfair diba!!! I have nothing to gain and I have nothing to lose too\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I don’t mind the use by an unbeliever of bible verses in his discussion with me. I assure you I don’t intend to be hostile to anybody. When I said even Satan quoted scriptures in his talk with Jesus, I was stating a fact which can be read from the bible.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

And I don\u2019t even have a plan to ask you for a proof, like the proof that I am asking from other character here in pacland, because I know you are not the right entity\/person to ask that type of question\u2026<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

OK, you didn’t plan to ask although you stated you “just only NEED BETTER PROOF”.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For this particular topic\/subject of MAKIND CREATION mang Epie, I\u2019m not sure WHO IS BLINDED in mind\u2026mang Epie\u2026 I will not gain anything here even if I can prove to you that your understanding is wrong\u2026<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

So, we can leave this matter behind.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

From the past there are many UNBELIEVER that were proven RIGHT in their understanding. That is why many Christian establishment accept the idea that through science, god revealed himself.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The “many Christian establishment” have the freedom what to “accept”.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Mang Epie, let me be clear, I am not asking you to be like me ( baka kasi iyan ang nasa-isip mo eh\u2026). I am just asking you if kung aayon ka sa aking UNDERSTANDING ng CREATION of MANKING\u2026 for this particular topic alone..<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

No, it’s not what I have in mind. As I’ve stated, your understanding now was my understanding years ago.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

So you have been to that process and from that kind of reasoning it seems, you are expecting the same way should happen for me\u2026 understanding little by little \u2013 and you are away ahead of me\u2026is that it Mang epie??.. I just want to clarify this\u2026<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Yes. I’m “ahead” simply because I am a Christian now and you are not. Not yet, that is. Eventually, everyone will be called to undergo the processes of salvation and Godly image creation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Shaky you may say, pero, between our UNDERSTANDINGs \u2013 CREATION of MANKIND STILL in PROGRESS against CREATION of MANKIND ALREADY DONE \u2013 
both are according to the baybol, 
mine \u2013 I only use one book to support it, in a chronological way
while yours \u2013 from one apostle to another, from back to front and given the credibility of the apostle we can say that they are SINUNGALIN\u2026 malay mo na MISQUOTE lang ng mga apostle si dyesus\u2026

*and now let me ask you this question again \u2013 and I can definitely say that it is a good example of a ABSOLUTE question that needs ABSOLUTE answer\u2026

IS THERE A POSSIBILITY THAT AN \u201c UNBELIEVER LIKE ME\u201d COULD UNDERSTAND THE WHOLE PROCESS OF MANKIND CREATION better than YOU, mang Epie?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

No, mang gorio.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

How do you think he is going to correct you? Pwede kayang manggaling sa UNBELIEVER young correction na yoon?… Sa tingin mo sa ANONG paraan ka pwedeng i-CORRECT ni father god?.. you might end up asking the same proof as I do if you will not even give any consideration that MY UNDERSTANDING is MORE CLOSER to what the Gen 1:26 is saying.. dib a mange pie???<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

God is going to correct – “teach” – a Christian through the Holy Spirit in the Christian mang gorio.

John 14:26 But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you.

I have to quote verses to benefit bible students.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But your target your are the believers right mange pie, don\u2019t you think those basher are part of the whole scheme.. so what does these tells you??<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

It’s good to discuss bible teachings with bible believers because the degrees in understanding differ. Some are new converts while the others have been studying years ahead. With the guidance of the Holy Spirit, unity in the knowledge “to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ” will be attained (Ephesians 4:11-13).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Iyan mange pi, tingnan mo, kapag binasa ng from top to bottom \u2013 ANG resulta at ang ibig ipahiwatig ay kakaiba kapag binasa ng PABALIGTAD, bottom to the top \u2013 
So between our two different UNDERSTANDING, both are according to the baybol, sino ang mas-closer sa GUSTONG ipahiwatig???… isa pa!!! dyan mo makikita ang flaws sa ACCORDING to the BIBLE that you are keep on saying\u2026

now my question again

dont you think that the ” according to the bible” dictum of yours are flawed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Not a bit mang gorio.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

So do you mean between BELIEVERS and UNBELIEVERs, ALWAYS young BELIEVER ang NA-AAYON SA GOD at YOONG SA UNBELIEVER ay hindi NAAYON???<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Yes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Hindi ba nasagi sa isip mo mang epie na, maybe.. me the \u201cUNBELIEVER\u201d ay gumaganap ng papel ni Philip this time, kahit dito lang sa SUBJECT na CREATION of MANKIND??<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

No. Philip is a believer.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Just bear in mind mange pie, kung kalian mo dapat ihiwalay ang iyong sarili sa iyong \u201cUNDERSTANDING\u201d ng baybol….. and I hope in my post I have shown that I’m doing it…<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

My understanding now is improved compared with what I had when I was discussing with Tony and the other old PRMOers mang gorio.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Yes mang Epie , I will\u2026 and so far I think I have a good understanding of my situation and my RESPONSIBILITY being \u201c UNBELIEVER\u201d — the more na walang naniniwala sa akin mange pie\u2026 THE BETTER for me\u2026walang halong biro<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I just share my views. That’s my part of the job. Opening minds to understand is God’s.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20:<\/strong> I will say these mang Epie na walang halong pangungutya !!!!!

WOW mang Epie, WOW!!!

ONLY BELIEVERS can UNDERSTAND THE BIBLE…. WOW!!!

god must be a REPUBLICAN!!!

Look at the timeline between NT and OT,, mang epie….
New Testament is a CORRECTION of Old Testament and it was done through dyesus as per your belief.. 

mang epie… eh malay mo na-MISQUOTE nina Pablo si dyesus…

*********************

TOPIC: CREATION of MANKIND, DONE or STILL in the PROCESS?

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Gen 1: 26 Then God said, \u201cLet us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals,[a] and over all the creatures that move along the ground.\u201d 

Gen 1: 27 So God created mankind in his own image, 
in the image of God he created them; 
male and female he created them. 

Gen 2: 4 This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created, when the LORD God made the earth and the heavens. 

Gen 2: 22 And the LORD God said, \u201cThe man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.\u201d 

Gen 5: 1 This is the written account of Adam\u2019s family line. 
When God created mankind, he made them in the likeness of God. 2 He created them male and female and blessed them. And he named them \u201cMankind\u201d[a] when they were created. 

*****************************************
This is my last post here mang epie regarding the ACCOUNT of CREATION of MANKIND… anyway I know being an “UNBELIEVER” my UNDERSTANDING with your baybol is NO good….. at saka , NAKUHA ko na kasi yoong sagot eh… I will not even attempt of UNDERSTANDING the your baybol until I become a BELIEVER…. but I can say too that I will not stop asking for a BETTER PROOF, a solid PROOF that is….

hopefully YOU will not end up asking the same PROOF as I DID…. if ask by unbeliever…

mang myztizo… can you provide me that PROOF……<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA: <\/strong>gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I will say these mang Epie na walang halong pangungutya !!!!!

WOW mang Epie, WOW!!!

ONLY BELIEVERS can UNDERSTAND THE BIBLE…. WOW!!!

god must be a REPUBLICAN!!!<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The following post is for bible students.

Only those who have the Holy Spirit of God “can UNDERSTAND THE BIBLE” since understanding is revealed through God’s Spirit.

1 Corinthians 2:9 But as it is written: 
\u201cEye has not seen, nor ear heard,
Nor have entered into the heart of man
The things which God has prepared for those who love Him.\u201d
10 But God has revealed them to us through His Spirit.

Without God’s Holy Spirit in a person, “the things of the spirit” are but “foolishness to him”.

1 Corinthians 2:13 These things we also speak, not in words which man\u2019s wisdom teaches but which the Holy Spirit teaches, comparing spiritual things with spiritual. 14 But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Look at the timeline between NT and OT,, mang epie….
New Testament is a CORRECTION of Old Testament and it was done through dyesus as per your belief.. 

mang epie… eh malay mo na-MISQUOTE nina Pablo si dyesus…<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I’ve read the NT and there is no contradiction mang gorio.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20 wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

TOPIC: CREATION of MANKIND, DONE or STILL in the PROCESS?

Gen 1: 26 Then God said, \u201cLet us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals,[a] and over all the creatures that move along the ground.\u201d 

Gen 1: 27 So God created mankind in his own image, 
in the image of God he created them; 
male and female he created them. 

Gen 2: 4 This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created, when the LORD God made the earth and the heavens. 

Gen 2: 22 And the LORD God said, \u201cThe man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.\u201d 

Gen 5: 1 This is the written account of Adam\u2019s family line. 
When God created mankind, he made them in the likeness of God. 2 He created them male and female and blessed them. And he named them \u201cMankind\u201d[a] when they were created. 

This is my last post here mang epie regarding the ACCOUNT of CREATION of MANKIND… anyway I know being an “UNBELIEVER” my UNDERSTANDING with your baybol is NO good….. at saka , NAKUHA ko na kasi yoong sagot eh… I will not even attempt of UNDERSTANDING the your baybol until I become a BELIEVER…. but I can say too that I will not stop asking for a BETTER PROOF, a solid PROOF that is….

hopefully YOU will not end up asking the same PROOF as I DID…. if ask by unbeliever…

mang myztizo… can you provide me that PROOF……<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Don’t overlook the best and handy “PROOF” mang gorio. Just pinch yourself. If it hurts (unless you have that ailment), then you are still flesh and blood. Dust. Mortal. 

God is Spirit, immortal, and he is making man to be like him, spirit. 

Thanks for your posts mang gorio. It was a good study exercise. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Doming: <\/strong>Matthew 16:18-19: “And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

Noy epie, I’ve made the ‘you’ words bigger so everybody can see. Who do you think the ‘YOU’ referring to??
I dont need a greek or hebrew, aramaic to perceive this verse. It is crystal clear that ‘YOU word in this verse is referring to PETER.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Matthew 16:18-19: “And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

@ noy epie, It’ is clear as a glass of water that GOD has choosen PETER to identify who christ is, As he (peter)
the only Apostles who return and responded the real answer of Jesus inquisition to his disciple.

17 Jesus replied, \u201cBlessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven. 

And by that verse, its very clear the binding and loosing is in the hand of PETER.
NOY EPIE!! out of context is only PRE-TEXT.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

And pre-text only is dangerous teaching noy epie, you can be labelled as erroneus Pharisee. <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA: <\/strong>Doming, believe what you like. We have discussed this subject many times already. If you think Peter is the rock upon which the Church is built and don’t accept my belief that the rock is Christ, so be it.

Here’s another explanation from a bible companion reference: http:\/\/www.levendwater.org\/companion\/append147.html<\/a>

147. “THOU ART PETER” 
(Matt. 16:18).

As explained in the notes, the two Greek words petros and petra are quite distinct, the former being masculine gender, and the latter feminine. The latter denotes a rock or cliff, in situ, firm and immovable. The former denotes a fragment of it, which one traveler may move with his foot in one direction and another may throw in another. This former word petros is the Greek translation kephas, a stone, which was Peter’s name in Aramaic, as was his appellative “Barjona” (John 1:42). See Ap. 94. III. 3. 

It is remarkable that there is only one other instance (Luke 22:34) in which our Lord addressed him as “Peter”; but, in all other cases, by his fore-name “Simon”, reminding him of what he was before his call, and of the characteristics of his human nature. In that other instance it is used in connection with the coming exhibition of his weakness, in the prediction of his denial of the Lord. 

There is thus a special significance in the use of the word “Peter” in Matt. 16:18. It was the name connected with his commission and apostleship; another commission being about to be committed to him. It was not Peter, the man, who would be the foundation, for, as we have said, petra is feminine, and must refer to a feminine noun expressed or implied. that noun could hardly be any other than homologia, which means a confession; and it was Peter’s confession that was the one subject of the Father’s revelation and the Son’s confirmation. 

Moreover, in 1Cor. 3:11 it has once for all been declared by the Holy Spirit that “OTHER foundation can no man lay than that IS LAID, which is JESUS CHRIST”. The earliest known reference to Matt. 16:18 is found in ORIGEN’S Commentary (A.D. 186-253), which is older than any extant Greek manuscript. He says :
“If we also say the same as Peter, ‘Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God’, not by the instruction of flesh and blood, but by the illumination of the heavenly Father in our hearts, we ourselves become the same thing as Peter.
“If you should think that the whole church was built by God only on that one, Peter, what will you say of John … or each of the apostles?” (*1)

This is conclusive as to the interpretation. But there are other and later references to these words by AUGUSTINE (A.D. 378), and JEROME (A.D. 305), alike older than any Greek MSS. now extant. 
JEROME wrote thus in his exposition (Benedictine ed.) :
“And I tell thee, that thou has said to Me, ‘Thou art the Christ’, &c., and I tell thee that thou art Peter, and on this rock, &c.” (*2)

AUGUSTINE wrote in his Retractationes (Benedictine ed., vol. i, p. 33) :
“I have somewhere said, concerning the apostle Peter, that the Church was founded on him, as a petra, or rock; but I know that I have since very often explained what our Lord said to signify on Him Whom Peter confessed; but between these two opinions, let the reader choose that which is the more probable.” (*3)

In AUGUSTINE’S Sermon In die Pentecostis (Benedictine ed., tom. v. p. 1097; also Pusey’s Translation, Sermons on the New Testament, vol. i. p. 215), he explains the reason for this retractation in a paraphrastic citation of the whole context :–
“When our Lord had asked His disciples who men said that He was, and when, in reporting the opinions of others, they had said that some said He was John, some Elijah, others Jeremiah or one of the prophets, He said to them : ‘But ye, Who do ye say that I am?’ Peter (one alone for the rest, one for all) answered, ‘Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.’ This, most excellently, most truly spoken, was deservedly rewarded with this reply : ‘Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jonah, because flesh and blood revealed not this to thee, but My Father Who is in heaven; and I tell thee that thou hast said’ : (hast said, observe, hast made confession unto Me : receive therefore the benediction) : ‘and I tell thee that thou art Peter; and on this rock I will build My church.'” (*4)

Some have conjectured from these words “tu dixisti” (thou hast said it) that AUGUSTINE and JEROME must have had in the MSS. from which they translated six letters, which they divided into two words “SU EIPS” (*5), taking EIPS as an abbreviation of EIPAS ( = thou hast said). There must have been another division of the same six letters into three words, which was current even then, for both these Fathers add “SU EI PETROS” = thou art Peter; taking the same “PS” as an abbreviation of PETROS. 

It is evident, however, that these Fathers give only a paraphrase; and do not profess to be giving an exact quotation. One thing, however, is certain, and that is our only point in this Appendix, viz. that the earliest references made to this passage disclaim all idea of its having any reference to the apostle Peter, but only to HIM Who was the subject of Peter’s confession.<\/strong>
—————————————————————
(*1) ei de epi ton hena ekeinon Petron nomizeis hupo tou Theou okiodomeisthai ten pasan ekklesian monon, ti oun phesais peri Ioannou, tou tes brontes, e hekastou ton apostolon. 

(*2) “Quid est quod ait? Et ego dico tibi tu mihi dixisti (tu es Christus filius Dei vivi); et ego dico tibi quia TU mihi dexisti (tu es Christus filius Dei vivi); et ego dico tibi (non sermone casso et nullum habenti opus, sed dico tibi, quia meum dixisse, fecisse est) quia tu es Petrus; et super hanc petram aedificabo ecclesiam meam.” 

(*3) “Dixi in quodam loco de apostolo Petro, quod in illo, quasi in petra, fundata sit ecclesia; sed scio me postea saepissime sic exposuisse quod a Domino dictum est, ut super hunc intelligetur quem confessus est Petrus : horum autem duarum sententiarum quae sit probabilior, eligat lector.” (Italics, ours.) 

(*4) “Cum interrogasset ipse Dominus discipulos suos, quis ab hominibus diceretur, et aliorum opiniones recolendo dixissent; quod alii eum dicerent Ioannem, alii Eliam, alii Ieremiam, aut unum ex prophetic, ait illis, ‘Vos autem quem Me esse dictis?’ Et Petrus, unus pro ceteris, unus pro omnibus, ‘Tu es, inquit, Christus filius Dei vivi.’ Hoc, optime, veracissime, merito tale responsum accipere meruit : ‘Beatus es, Simon Bar Ionae, quia non tibi revelavit caro et sanguis, sed Pater Meus qui in coelis est : et Ego dico tibi, quia tu dixisti’ : Mihi dixisti audi; dedisti confessionem. Recipe benedictionem ergo : ‘Et dico tibi, Tu es Petrus — et super hanc petram aedificabo ecclesiam Meam'”. 

(*5) It will be seen from Ap. 94. V. i. 3 that in the Greek manuscripts there was no division between the letters or words until the ninth century.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

miztyzo562: <\/strong>Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Doming, believe what you like.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Seriously… Dont bother with this guy… He claims he’s a Retired Special Focres Lt. Col, Former POW and CIA operative… In other words,, this guy needs some counseling.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA: <\/strong>LOL!<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

jafra<\/strong>: <\/strong>post your argument Mizty. attacking someone’s character doesn’t make you any smarter <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

miztyzo562: <\/strong>Heres your argument:

viewtopic.php?f=20&t=186836&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=45<\/a>

viewtopic.php?f=20&t=171297&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&hilit=special+forces&start=135<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Doming: <\/strong>Noy epie, we all know the rock is Christ, the true foundation of the church. But, if we go back to ‘upon this rock’
if you take out rock it would read ‘upon this’, ‘this’ refers to PETER, the nearest referent. Jesus has the authority over heaven and Earth…whereas, PETER was given authority here on earth to bind and loose.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA:<\/strong> I believe we both have expressed to each our respective position on this topic Bai Doming. And I posted above the bible companion appendix on the subject.

Unless the comment or question comes from another or new poster, I’ll no longer comment. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Doming: <\/strong>I’m not disputing here that Christ is not the real rock. He is. Jesus has also the keys of death and hades. as you read the apocalypse has show us that. Jesus honor these distinction upon PETER, as his primary deputy once Jesus has mount up to his FATHER. This emphasize that Jesus giving PETER heavenly designation or divine appointment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Its alright noy epie…I’m just giving you the adjacent of your teaching..the only thing that I hope for is that in GOD’s will you will be some-how right, cause if you dont you know what the outcome of False teaching.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA:<\/strong> Doming wrote:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I’m not disputing here that Christ is not the real rock. He is. Jesus has also the keys of death and hades. as you read the apocalypse has show us that. Jesus honor these distinction upon PETER, as his primary deputy once Jesus has mount up to his FATHER. This emphasize that Jesus giving PETER heavenly designation or divine appointment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/p>\n\n\n\n

About Peter’s supposedly being “primary deputy”, read first my discussion with el kapre starting on page 2 of this thread. Make your comments and, if need be, I’ll add to what I’ve already posted in response to el kap’s posts.  <\/strong><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Doming: <\/strong>I have read that noy epie and that’s the reason I’m here…If you can scroll up you can see my first re’buttal post in this thread. <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

To answer the question of this thread as WHY did christ build his church??

We need the Church in order to be saved. Jesus Christ gave us the Church as the exclusive means by which we become united to Him through the sacraments, which allow us to grow in holiness, and give us the best chance for salvation. Those outside the Church are, objectively speaking, in a spiritually deficient condition, although they can still be saved by Christ. But the Church gives us the totality of the means of salvation through Christ and His Eucharistic sacrifice, which the Church celebrates from the rising of the sun to its setting. The Church is the sacrament of salvation. Regularly receiving the sacraments that Christ instituted is the way that Jesus has set the whole thing up. Confession is the normative way that God forgives sins. The Eucharist is the greatest gift God has given to us this side of heaven – because it is Jesus Christ Himself. It is only in the Church where we eat His body and drink His blood as Jesus commanded us. 

You cannot receive these sacraments outside the Church where there is no valid priesthood. The Catholic Church is the bride of Christ, and we are adopted sons of the Father in Christ through His bride, the Church. You are right to say this is also a matter of faith. The Church is supernatural, not just a human institution. That is why the Church is an article of faith. Pray to Mary, the Mother of the Church, to give you the wisdom you need to truly comprehend its magnificence and necessity.

Grace be with you.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA: <\/strong>Your post is according to your church’s teaching Mr. Doming. I’ll not contest that. I’ll not ask you to post the bible references because yours is based on another source.

This thread is about the Church Jesus built according to the bible.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

If you can’t identify with el kapre’s point of view which is saying practically your view, the more you couldn’t with mine. <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Icecream:  <\/strong>Correct me if I’m wrong but Jesus never build a Church when he still alive.
Unless he told it to his disciples after His resurrection.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA: <\/strong>You’re right. The Church is formed by people indwelt with the Holy Spirit. Unless there are people so indwelt, no Church would be formed. 

The Holy Spirit was made available after Christ ascended back to heaven, after his resurrection from the dead, where he sent the Holy Spirit at Pentecost (Acts 2).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Doming: <\/strong>Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Your post is according to your church’s teaching Mr. Doming. I’ll not contest that. I’ll not ask you to post the bible references because yours is based on another source.

This thread is about the Church Jesus built according to the bible.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Of course, It will be base according to the bible. where else? The bible is a product of the church. It is not
the other away around. The one true church and how to recognize it:

Use this guidance as to determine:

It was founded by Jesus Christ Himself in Mt 16:18. 
*It would be built on Simon Peter, Mt 16:18. 
*It would be defended by GOD Himself, Mt 16:18-19. 
*It would have authority given by Jesus Christ, Mt 16:19,18:17-18. 
*It would be guided by the Holy Spirit who will dwell within it, Jn 14:15-17, Act 15:28,16:6. 
*It would be one and undivided, Mk 3:24-25. 
*It would have one fold and one shepherd, Jn 10:16. 
*It would have Priests, Bishops, and Deacons, 1Tim 3:1-13. 
*It must have the Holy Eucharist celebration, Jn 6:42-70, Act 2:42. 
*It must be found in all nations, Mt 28:19. 
*It must be found in all centuries, Mt 28:20. 
*Jesus Christ said He would be with His Church every day, in every year, until the end of the world, Mt 28:20. This means no gaps in time. 

EXAMINE YOUR CHURCH IF IT MEETS ALL THESE EQUIREMENTS, I know, noy epie church has a human founder and have not reached 2000 years of history. So, he dont have any solid basis or evidence except the bible. As what St. Augustine said: “I should not believe the Gospel except as moved by the authority of the Catholic Church.” 
Saint Augustine (354-430), Against the Letter of Mani, 5,6, 397 A.D..<\/p>\n\n\n\n

genetophile: <\/strong>The apostles preached Christ and not the church.

Acts 3:20 …In that He may send Jesus Christ, who was preached to you before.
Acts 5:42 Daily in the Temple, and in every house, they did not cease preaching and teaching Jesus as the Christ.
Acts 8:5 Then Philip went down to the city of Samaria and preached Christ to them.
Acts 8:35 Then Philip opened his mouth, and beginning at this scripture, preached Jesus to him.
Acts 11:20 But some of them were men from Cypress and Cyrene, who, when they had come to Antioch, spoke to the Hellenists, preaching the Lord Jesus.
1Cor 1:23 But we preach Christ crucified…
2Cor 1:19 For the Son of God, Jesus Christ, who was preached among you by us…
2Cor 4:5 For we do not preach ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord…
Col 1:27-28 …Christ in you, the hope of glory. Him we preach…<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA: <\/strong>Doming wrote:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Of course, It will be base according to the bible. where else? The bible is a product of the church. It is not
the other away around. The one true church and how to recognize it:

Use this guidance as to determine:

It was founded by Jesus Christ Himself in Mt 16:18. 
*It would be built on Simon Peter, Mt 16:18. 
*It would be defended by GOD Himself, Mt 16:18-19. 
*It would have authority given by Jesus Christ, Mt 16:19,18:17-18. 
*It would be guided by the Holy Spirit who will dwell within it, Jn 14:15-17, Act 15:28,16:6. 
*It would be one and undivided, Mk 3:24-25. 
*It would have one fold and one shepherd, Jn 10:16. 
*It would have Priests, Bishops, and Deacons, 1Tim 3:1-13. 
*It must have the Holy Eucharist celebration, Jn 6:42-70, Act 2:42. 
*It must be found in all nations, Mt 28:19. 
*It must be found in all centuries, Mt 28:20. 
*Jesus Christ said He would be with His Church every day, in every year, until the end of the world, Mt 28:20. This means no gaps in time. 

EXAMINE YOUR CHURCH IF IT MEETS ALL THESE EQUIREMENTS, I know, noy epie church has a human founder and have not reached 2000 years of history. So, he dont have any solid basis or evidence except the bible. As what St. Augustine said: “I should not believe the Gospel except as moved by the authority of the Catholic Church.” 
Saint Augustine (354-430), Against the Letter of Mani, 5,6, 397 A.D..<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I’ll cite a test your belief is not what the bible teaches. This is what you stated:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Doming wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We need the Church in order to be saved.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

To the diligent bible student, the Savior is Christ. The Church are the people who have been saved from their past sins.

I’ll add just one: Your authority is “the Catholic Church”. Mine is God’s which has been given to Jesus Christ, the head of the Church.

Matthew 28:18 And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, \u201cAll authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. 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, 20 teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Super Pacman: <\/strong>Church has two meanings, the building where we pray most of the time and the people itself. Church can be found among us people who believed in God.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA: <\/strong>Would you mind citing the basis or reference of your position?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Super Pacman: <\/strong>This is my belief Sir:

The word “church” (ecclesia) in the New Testament is used to refer both to the church in the strict sense of all believers in Christ of all times and places, and to the church in the broader sense of visible assemblies gathered around Word and sacraments. St. Paul refers to the church in the stricter sense in 1 Cor. 1:2 as “all those everywhere who call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ–their Lord and ours… . This is the body of Christ (1 Cor. 12), whose membership is known only to God, for He alone can see into the human heart and know whether true faith in Christ is present (thus it is “invisible” to the human eye and is an article of faith). In the Apostles Creed we confess that we believe in “the Holy Christian Church, the communion of saints.” 

At the same time, the New Testament uses the term “church” to refer to the external (“visible” to the human eye) communities (assemblies) of those who profess to be Christians and gather around the means of grace, Word and sacraments. For example, Paul addresses his epistle “to the churches in Galatia.” This broader sense of the term refers to the various congregations in the Roman province of Galatia. These external communities included both true Christians (with true faith in the heart) and unbelievers and hypocrites who were members in name only.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA: <\/strong>Thank you sir.

I asked for reference because you stated that one meaning of Church is “the building where we pray most of the time”. The reference you cited, however, has no reference to a building where people pray. And rightly so.

While Paul mentions “building”, this refers to the person and not to a structure made of wood and stone and metal. 

1 Corinthians 3:9 For we are God\u2019s fellow workers; you are God\u2019s field, you are God\u2019s building.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Icecream<\/strong>: <\/strong>Sa dami ba naman ng relihyon ngayon, paano malalaman yung totoo?
Ang daling kumita ng mga malaki sa relihiyon a.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA: <\/strong>Test a group’s teachings whether or not these conform to those in the bible.

1 Thessalonians 5:21 Test all things; hold fast what is good.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

jafra: <\/strong>what is meant “good” to others may be “bad” to others. there’s no way of knowing other than respect and tolerance to other people.
The Golden Rule
The Golden Rule or ethic of reciprocity is a maxim, an ethical code, or a morality, that essentially states either of the following:

1. One should treat others as one would like others to treat oneself (positive form)
2. One should not treat others in ways that one would not like to be treated (negative\/prohibitive form, also called the Silver Rule)

The Golden Rule is arguably the most essential basis for the modern concept of human rights, in which each individual has a right to just treatment, and a reciprocal responsibility to ensure justice for others. A key element of the Golden Rule is that a person attempting to live by this rule treats all people with consideration, not just members of his or her in-group. The Golden Rule has its roots in a wide range of world cultures, and is a standard which different cultures use to resolve conflicts.

Mathew 7:12 So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets….what if I’m a religious person and I want to be treated according to my religious belief, this verse teaches you to impose your belief to others ‘coz that’s what you want to be treated…not agreeable to this.  
…one example of this are Jehovah’s Witness who keeps knockin your door. after a while it get’s so annoying, even though they have good intention, not all people like what they do. <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA: <\/strong>New King James Version, not King James Version. I recommend every authorized content and disregard the unauthorized. The unauthorized are usually indicated in the footnotes.

An example is 1 John 5:7-8:

1 John 5:7 For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. 8 And there are three that bear witness on earth:[b] the Spirit, the water, and the blood; and these three agree as one.

Notice the “[b]” indicating there is a footnote. And the footnote states:
b. 1 John 5:8 NU-Text and M-Text omit the words from in heaven (verse 7) through on earth (verse 8 ). Only four or five very late manuscripts contain these words in Greek.

Hence, the passage should only be:

1 John 5:7 For there are three that bear witness the Spirit, the water, and the blood; and these three agree as one.

Source: biblegateway.com http:\/\/www.biblegateway.com\/passage\/?se … rsion=NKJV<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

jafra: <\/strong>…and since when did the new version King James version arrived? ‘coz I find it puzzling a book that’s suppose to contain the word of God is subject to amendment. <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA: <\/strong>“Amendment” is inapplicable. Language changes. English keeps changing. New words derived from other languages are added while less utilized words are used lesser and lesser until these become lost.

It is not God’s message which is changed but how this message is conveyed to the current readers by the use of contemporary language.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

burnok5: <\/strong>masyadong malalim sa akin yong NKJ& KJ bible ka epie.. NIV gamit ko..may sablay din ba don? tanong lang..<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA: <\/strong>NKJV. I started reading the NIV but stopped since. “may sablay din…don”.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Mang Heruino:  <\/strong>How about Bible in tagaog, Ka Epi, what version would you suggest?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA: <\/strong>I use the Tagalog and Cebuano versions which are available online only to translate the English version verses when I translate my English posts. So I can’t suggest any Tagalog version since so far I only used this one: http:\/\/angbiblia.net\/<\/a>

But I’m careful in the use of the Tagalog and Cebuano versions online because some of the words translated are not the accurate equivalents of the English words. The reason is that the translations have been influenced or clouded by the translators’ level of understanding of the scripture.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria<\/strong>: <\/strong>Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The answer to the question is so that Christ will be revealed to those whom God will draw to Jesus and for them to really know who he and what his purpose is. This answer is shown in Matthew 16:13-20 where in verse 18 Jesus declared that he will build his Church:

Matthew 13:13 When Jesus came into the region of Caesarea Philippi, He asked His disciples, saying, \u201cWho do men say that I, the Son of Man, am?\u201d 
14 So they said, \u201cSome say John the Baptist, some Elijah, and others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.\u201d 
15 He said to them, \u201cBut who do you say that I am?\u201d 
16 Simon Peter answered and said, \u201cYou are the Christ, the Son of the living God.\u201d 
17 Jesus answered and said to him, \u201cBlessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in heaven. 18 And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it. 19 And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.\u201d 
20 Then He commanded His disciples that they should tell no one that He was Jesus the Christ.

The conversation between Jesus and his disciples started with the question as to who men say Jesus was (verse 13). The disciples stated the guesses of men (verse 14) which were incorrect. Then God revealed who Jesus was to Peter who spoke out Christ’s identity (verses 15-17). After the disciples were told that he was “the Christ, the Son of the living God\u201d, Jesus told them that upon him (Christ) he will build his Church (verse 18).
The Church is linked with knowing Jesus as the Christ or the Messiah or the Savior. The answer then to the question why did Christ build his Church is so that those who will be made a part of it will know him and his purpose. (Knowing who Jesus is and his purpose in becoming flesh is another topic for discussion.)

In verse 20, Jesus specifically commanded “the disciples that they should tell no one that He was Jesus the Christ”. Those who will not be made part of the Body of Christ, the Church that Jesus built, in this age will not know. and will not even be interested in knowing. who “the Son of Man” is.

Comments are welcome. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is wrong biblically. Church is owned and built by God the Father and not Christ. I will give you the verse if you asked? =><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA: <\/strong>Read again the thread title. The topic is not on who owns but who built the Church.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria<\/strong>: <\/strong>Yup. Didn’t you see it? Owned and BUILT by God the Father. Not only He owns it, but He also built it. That is what the bible says. If you will ask the verses, explanation of the bible and not my own explanation. I will give you the verses. =><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA:<\/strong> You should have posted already the verses when you made your comment.

I think we can shorten the discussion as to who is the actual builder of the Church by identifying who functions as the executive of the God family.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria<\/strong>: <\/strong>I will sit for this for a while, but right now Im at the office. Later, Basketball. Tom am, volleyball, but yeah sure verses are coming to enlighten you. =><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria<\/strong>:<\/strong> Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

You should have posted already the verses when you made your comment.

I think we can shorten the discussion as to who is the actual builder of the Church by identifying who functions as the executive of the God family.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

We can shorten the discussion buy telling you the answer in the bible of who built the church. You said it was Jesus. The bible says, it was God the Father. 

Here is what the bible is telling us. I chose to post the tagalog verse for the others to understand more. 

– When Jesus said “Upon this rock I WILL BUILD MY CHURCH”, it was not actually Jesus who said it, it was God the Father. (Do I have proof in the bible? and Did I interpret it wrongly?)

It was Jesus himself who said that those were not his words, but his Father’s.

Juan 14:24 
“Ang hindi umiibig sa akin ay hindi tumutupad ng aking mga salita: at ang salitang inyong 
narinig ay HINDI AKIN, KUNDI SA AMANG nagsugo sa akin.”

So when Jesus said he will build his church, those were his Father’s words. It was his Father who built the church. 

Are there still any proof in the bible the supports this premise that it was the Father who built the church?

Hebreo 3:4 
“Sapagka’t ang bawa’t bahay ay may nagtayo; datapuwa’t ang nagtayo ng lahat ng mga bagay ay ang Dios”

– It is clear, everything or all things, it was God the Father who built it and the church was included there. 

– That’s the reason why 12 verses in the bible say, CHURCH OF GOD!<\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA:<\/strong> howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We can shorten the discussion buy telling you the answer in the bible of who built the church. You said it was Jesus. The bible says, it was God the Father.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

You should have responded to my statement as to who you believe, if you believe there is such a function, is the executive of the two beings in the God family.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Here is what the bible is telling us. I chose to post the tagalog verse for the others to understand more.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

You should realize the forum is read worldwide. More will understand English rather than tagalog. Yamato is one. The non-tagalog speakers in the Philippines don’t like tagalog to be regarded as “Filipino” the Constitution refers to also. Just ask the Cebuanos. English is one of the two official languages of the Philippines together with “Filipino” which is not tagalog. “Filipino” as a language is yet to be developed.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

– When Jesus said “Upon this rock I WILL BUILD MY CHURCH”, it was not actually Jesus who said it, it was God the Father. (Do I have proof in the bible? and Did I interpret it wrongly?)

It was Jesus himself who said that those were not his words, but his Father’s.

Juan 14:24 
“Ang hindi umiibig sa akin ay hindi tumutupad ng aking mga salita: at ang salitang inyong 
narinig ay HINDI AKIN, KUNDI SA AMANG nagsugo sa akin.”

So when Jesus said he will build his church, those were his Father’s words. It was his Father who built the church. 

Are there still any proof in the bible the supports this premise that it was the Father who built the church?

Hebreo 3:4 
“Sapagka’t ang bawa’t bahay ay may nagtayo; datapuwa’t ang nagtayo ng lahat ng mga bagay ay ang Dios”

– It is clear, everything or all things, it was God the Father who built it and the church was included there. 

– That’s the reason why 12 verses in the bible say, CHURCH OF GOD!<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

You said before the verses you will provide will enlighten me. What I am enlightened to is your understanding of the verses and not really what I hope would improve my understanding of the verses. 

Your use of John 14:24 is inappropriate to support your belief that the Father and not Jesus built the Church. Jesus statement in this verse is of a context different from that in Matthew 16:13-20.

John 14:19 \u201cA little while longer and the world will see Me no more, but you will see Me. Because I live, you will live also. 20 At that day you will know that I am in My Father, and you in Me, and I in you. 21 He who has My commandments and keeps them, it is he who loves Me. And he who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and manifest Myself to him.\u201d 
22 Judas (not Iscariot) said to Him, \u201cLord, how is it that You will manifest Yourself to us, and not to the world?\u201d 
23 Jesus answered and said to him, \u201cIf anyone loves Me, he will keep My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our home with him. 24 He who does not love Me does not keep My words; and the word which you hear is not Mine but the Father\u2019s who sent Me.

As to the passages which point to ownership of the Church, it should not be an issue. What God the Father owns Jesus Christ also owns. While 12 verses say “Church of God”, there is another which says “churches of Christ” referring to the churches of God which are situated in different places.

Romans 16:16 Greet one another with a holy kiss. The churches of Christ greet you.

You might want to enlighten me about your belief by answering this question: Has the Father been dealing, like talking to and interacting with, any man aside from Jesus Christ? Had any man ever heard the Father himself talk?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria<\/strong>: <\/strong>So what is the function of Christ in the church?
He is the HEAD & SAVIOUR of the church. 

Efeso 5: 23
“Sapagka’t ang lalake ay pangulo ng kaniyang asawa, gaya naman 
ni Cristo na pangulo ng iglesia, na siya rin ang tagapagligtas ng katawan.”

What is th proof that the body is pertaining to the church?

Colosas 1:18 
“At siya and ulo ng katawan, samakatuwid baga’y ng Iglesia.”
That is the answer of the bible. =><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA: <\/strong>You have judged my posts in this thread as “This is wrong biblically” which you did not really prove to be.

May I invite you to take a look at the related thread “Where is the Church Jesus Built?” in this link, viewtopic.php?f=20&t=158517<\/a>

I welcome comments from fellow bible believers and to discuss with them in humility with the object in mind of growing together in understanding.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria: <\/strong>EPIFANIO: You said before the verses you will provide will enlighten me. What I am enlightened to is your understanding of the\u00a0
verses and not really what I hope would improve my understanding of the verses.\u00a0

ME:\u00a0So what is your understanding of the verse Hebrew 3:4\u00a0

“For every house is built by some man; but he THAT BUILT ALL THINGS IS GOD.”

This is very easy to understand ryt!? Even a kid could simply understand this. That’s why I am wondering why YOU DIDN’T MENTION THIS VERSE, or maybe you know deep in your heart that this would answer your WRONG BELIEF AS WHO REALLY BUILT THE CHURCH.
It says there, ALL THINGS ARE BUILT BY GOD. ALL THINGS, there is no exception here and definitely THE CHURCH IS INCLUDED TO THOSE THINGS THAT GOD HAD BUILT.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

EPIFANIO:\u00a0Your use of John 14:24 is inappropriate to support your belief that the Father and not Jesus built the Church.\u00a0

ME:\u00a0John 14:24 “He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father’s which sent me.” KJV
This is clear again. Nothing is so deep. When Jesus said, “thou shall not kill”, “love your parents”, “love one another”, Jesus was the one who uttered it, but whose words or teachings were those? You know for sure is the answer.\u00a0

It’s like Mayor Binay for ex. said “I will gonna build a school on this site.”, but when it was all done, it is the face of president NOynoy posted coz if it’s not becoz of his power and will, Binay wont be able to do it. So when the term of noynoy had ended for ex, to whom is the credit of who really built that school? It’s Noynoy with the help of Binay since that place for example was under him.\u00a0

And again based in Hebrew 3:4, that answers your wrong belief that it was Christ who built the church. He is the head and savior of the body which is the church, but God was the one who built it. That is what the bible is telling us.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

EPIFANIO:\u00a0As to the passages which point to ownership of the Church, it should not be an issue. What God the Father owns Jesus Christ also owns. While 12 verses say “Church of God”, there is another which says “churches of Christ” referring to the churches\u00a0of God which are situated in different places.

Romans 16:16 Greet one another with a holy kiss. The churches of Christ greet you.
ME:\u00a0Yup and I know this is the favorite verse of the INCs even though you guys cant explain the meaning of HOLY KISS (banal na halik).\u00a0\u00a0You admit there are 12 verses that say CHURCH OF GOD. That shows again that He really is the one who owns AND BUILT IT.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

EPIFANIO:\u00a0You might want to enlighten me about your belief by answering this question: Has the Father been dealing, like talking to\u00a0and interacting with, any man aside from Jesus Christ? Had any man ever heard the Father himself talk?

ME:\u00a0The Father havent talked to anyman yet accdg to the bible, but yes He interacts thru His son primarily, angels, and the previous prophets. The mere fact that He sent us His son, for us to adhere on what He wants us to do, or simply His will, that was God’s interaction with us coz He wants us to be saved.\u00a0\u00a0

You settle first yourself with the verse HEBREW 3:4 and let’s talk about the other topic if you want.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

zorro05: <\/strong>This is becomming quite interesting….,  

one taking the short, concise route, while the other prefers<\/em>
to ‘circumnavigate in unchartered grounds’… <\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA:<\/strong> howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

EPIFANIO: You said before the verses you will provide will enlighten me. What I am enlightened to is your understanding of the\u00a0
verses and not really what I hope would improve my understanding of the verses.\u00a0

ME:\u00a0So what is your understanding of the verse Hebrew 3:4\u00a0

“For every house is built by some man; but he THAT BUILT ALL THINGS IS GOD.”

This is very easy to understand ryt!? Even a kid could simply understand this. That’s why I am wondering why YOU DIDN’T MENTION THIS VERSE, or maybe you know deep in your heart that this would answer your WRONG BELIEF AS WHO REALLY BUILT THE CHURCH.
It says there, ALL THINGS ARE BUILT BY GOD. ALL THINGS, there is no exception here and definitely THE CHURCH IS INCLUDED TO THOSE THINGS THAT GOD HAD BUILT.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

EPIFANIO:\u00a0Your use of John 14:24 is inappropriate to support your belief that the Father and not Jesus built the Church.\u00a0
ME:\u00a0John 14:24 “He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father’s which sent me.” KJV

This is clear again. Nothing is so deep. When Jesus said, “thou shall not kill”, “love your parents”, “love one another”, Jesus was the one who uttered it, but whose words or teachings were those? You know for sure is the answer.\u00a0

It’s like Mayor Binay for ex. said “I will gonna build a school on this site.”, but when it was all done, it is the face of president NOynoy posted coz if it’s not becoz of his power and will, Binay wont be able to do it. So when the term of noynoy had ended for ex, to whom is the credit of who really built that school? It’s Noynoy with the help of Binay since that place for example was under him.\u00a0

And again based in Hebrew 3:4, that answers your wrong belief that it was Christ who built the church. He is the head and savior of the body which is the church, but God was the one who built it. That is what the bible is telling us.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

EPIFANIO:\u00a0As to the passages which point to ownership of the Church, it should not be an issue. What God the Father owns Jesus Christ also owns. While 12 verses say “Church of God”, there is another which says “churches of Christ” referring to the churches\u00a0of God which are situated in different places.
Romans 16:16 Greet one another with a holy kiss. The churches of Christ greet you.

ME:\u00a0Yup and I know this is the favorite verse of the INCs even though you guys cant explain the meaning of HOLY KISS (banal na halik).\u00a0\u00a0You admit there are 12 verses that say CHURCH OF GOD. That shows again that He really is the one who owns AND BUILT IT.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

So your use of Heb 3:4 enlightened you to make you conclude that it is the Father who built the Church and not Jesus Christ. Now you will have a problem when you consider the verses that say that Jesus is the executive, the one through whom all things are built or made or created. (You made no comment on “executive”.)

John 1:3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.

Ephesians 3:9 and to make all see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the ages has been hidden in God who created all things through Jesus Christ;

What these verses really say is that there is no point in distinguishing who between the Father and Jesus built the Church of God. Jesus, as the Word and after his resurrection, was God and is God with God (John 1:1). There is ONE God, which is a family, composed of the Father and Jesus Christ. 

Your analogy of Binay & Noynoy is out of place. In the office of president, only one is president. In the class “God”, the two beings composing it are Gods, the Father known as God and the Word (Jesus) is also God. 

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Now you cite Heb 3:4 only to “prove” that God built all things. And yet, if you continue reading up to verse 6, you will read that the “house” is owned by Christ. “House” is also a reference to Church which is the group of Holy Spirit indwelt persons.

Hebrews 3:6 but Christ as a Son over His own house, whose house we are if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm to the end.

Simply put, you made an issue where there is none.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

EPIFANIO: You might want to enlighten me about your belief by answering this question: Has the Father been dealing, like talking to and interacting with, any man aside from Jesus Christ? Had any man ever heard the Father himself talk?
ME: The Father havent talked to anyman yet accdg to the bible, but yes He interacts thru His son primarily, angels, and the previous prophets. The mere fact that He sent us His son, for us to adhere on what He wants us to do, or simply His will, that was God’s interaction with us coz He wants us to be saved. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Now prove that the Father interacted with “the previous prophets”. The God of the OT must be the Father in your understanding which conflicts with mine. You might want to comment in the thread “Jesus is the God in the Old Testament”
in this link: viewtopic.php?f=20&t=188321<\/a>

Also, in your statement, “The mere fact that He sent us His son, for us to adhere on what He wants us to do, or simply His will, that was God’s interaction with us coz He wants us to be saved”, is saving the only purpose that God sent Jesus for man according to your enlightenment? <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

You settle first yourself with the verse HEBREW 3:4 and let’s talk about the other topic if you want. <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Respond to my comment on the verse above. I can echo your “if you want”. <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria<\/strong>: <\/strong>you actually gave the answers for your own misguided belief. I am gonna clarify this using the verses of the bible ofcorz. Just got work for now. => Just one question? 

When the bible said “He that built all things”, was the church included there? =>

I’ll be back. <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA: <\/strong>Don’t you think you need some humility in your words?  

I’ve stated that you are making an issue where there is none.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria<\/strong>: <\/strong>EPIFANIO: So your use of Heb 3:4 enlightened you to make you conclude that it is the Father who built the Church and not Jesus Christ. 

ME: Yup coz it’s not hard to understand the verse. When it says, “He that built all things” definitely to a clear mind, the church was included there. SO FOR YOU EVEN THE VERSE SAYS “ALL THINGS”, THE CHURCH WAS NOT INCLUDED? Is that it? If that’s the case, you are the one who has your own interpretation and explanation which is opposite to what the bible is saying  

EPIFANIO: Now you will have a problem when you consider the verses that say that Jesus is the executive, the one through whom all things are built or made or created. 
(You made no comment on “executive”.)

John 1:3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.

Ephesians 3:9 and to make all see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the ages has been hidden in God who created all things through Jesus Christ;

ME: Ofcorz I did consider that through Christ, everything was created. If it’s biblical, I would amen to that no problem, and actually this is our belief also since it’s biblical. In Genesis, there were mentions on how the Father started to build everything thru Christ. The Father is the master planner and Christ is the executor. The Father would just utter whatever He wants to have, and then Christ (the word, which was with God) executes it. Christ has become the tool FOR THE FATHER TO BUILD EVERYTHING, and this belief doesn’t contradict any verses in the bible. This accords with the verse HEBREW 3:4 which says God built everything and Ephesians 3:9 which says all things were created thru him (Christ). 

YOUR BELIEF IS THE PROBLEM HERE. Your belief is like, the shovel has been used to build a house, so the shovel was the one who built it. Ryt following your analogy? Which in reality and in rightful and good sense, we know it’s ridiculous to say that it was the shovel who built the church. 

And the fact that Christ was already with the Father since the beginning of everything, this shows that Jesus Christ is not human, coz INC’s like you believe that Christ is human ryt? (this is another issue anyway which we can also discuss some other time )

EPIFANIO: What these verses really say is that there is no point in distinguishing who between the Father and Jesus built the Church of God. 

ME: There is no point yet, the title of your thread emphasized that it’s Christ who built the church.  

EPIFANIO: Jesus, as the Word and after his resurrection, was God and is God with 
God (John 1:1). There is ONE God, which is a family, composed of the Father and Jesus Christ. 

ME: Didn’t this contradict INC’s belief about the real being of Christ. For INC’s Jesus is man ryt? but you now admit that it was clearly stated in the verse that Jesus is also a god just as the Father is a god.  

AND NOPE. There are lots of gods, and this is biblical, but definitely there is one and only God the Father. Even satan was called by the bible as god, GOD OF THIS EARTH it says.  

I will continue this. I just need to go home from work. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA:<\/strong> howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

EPIFANIO: So your use of Heb 3:4 enlightened you to make you conclude that it is the Father who built the Church and not Jesus Christ. 

ME: Yup coz it’s not hard to understand the verse.  When it says, “He that built all things” definitely to a clear mind, the church was included there. SO FOR YOU EVEN THE VERSE SAYS “ALL THINGS”, THE CHURCH WAS NOT INCLUDED? Is that it? If that’s the case, you are the one who has your own interpretation and explanation which is opposite to what the bible is saying <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I’ve commented on the “built”. Aren’t you going to respond to my comment on Heb. 3:6? It’s not difficult to understand.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

EPIFANIO: Now you will have a problem when you consider the verses that say that Jesus is the executive, the one through whom all things are built or made or created. 
(You made no comment on “executive”.)

John 1:3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.

Ephesians 3:9 and to make all see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the ages has been hidden in God who created all things through Jesus Christ;

ME: Ofcorz I did consider that through Christ, everything was created. If it’s biblical, I would amen to that no problem, and actually this is our belief also since it’s biblical. In Genesis, there were mentions on how the Father started to build everything thru Christ. The Father is the master planner and Christ is the executor. The Father would just utter whatever He wants to have, and then Christ (the word, which was with God) executes it. Christ has become the tool FOR THE FATHER TO BUILD EVERYTHING, and this belief doesn’t contradict any verses in the bible. This accords with the verse HEBREW 3:4 which says God built everything and Ephesians 3:9 which says all things were created thru him (Christ). 

YOUR BELIEF IS THE PROBLEM HERE. Your belief is like, the shovel has been used to build a house, so the shovel was the one who built it. Ryt following your analogy? Which in reality and in rightful and good sense, we know it’s ridiculous to say that it was the shovel who built the church. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

My belief is not a problem to me and neither should it be yours. I don’t make your “enlightenment” a problem to me. That’s your own lookout.

Your demotion of Christ as just being a “shovel”, a tool, is a disrespect to a God being. “God” does not refer to the Father alone. “God” also refers to a group, call it family, composed of the Father and Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

And the fact that Christ was already with the Father since the beginning of everything, this shows that Jesus Christ is not human, coz INC’s like you believe that Christ is human ryt? (this is another issue anyway which we can also discuss some other time )<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Didn’t the Word shed off his God nature to become mortal?

You’ve mentioned, unnecessarily in our exchanges, INC 2 times already. Do you have a quarrel with the INC?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

EPIFANIO: What these verses really say is that there is no point in distinguishing who between the Father and Jesus built the Church of God. 

ME: There is no point yet, the title of your thread emphasized that it’s Christ who built the church. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

You might want to read again my comment on this issue. If you still couldn’t get it, just leave it. <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

EPIFANIO: Jesus, as the Word and after his resurrection, was God and is God with God (John 1:1). There is ONE God, which is a family, composed of the Father and Jesus Christ. 

ME: Didn’t this contradict INC’s belief about the real being of Christ. For INC’s Jesus is man ryt? but you now admit that it was clearly stated in the verse that Jesus is also a god just as the Father is a god.  

AND NOPE. There are lots of gods, and this is biblical, but definitely there is one and only God the Father. Even satan was called by the bible as god, GOD OF THIS EARTH it says.  

I will continue this. I just need to go home from work. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The INC must have gotten your nerve as you can’t avoid thinking and talking about the group. 

You are digressing from what we were discussing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria<\/strong>:<\/strong> Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Don’t you think you need some humility in your words?  

I’ve stated that you are making an issue where there is none.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Telling your belief as a misguided belief is telling the truth and telling the truth is always right and good. or you just can’t disregard MAYBE what the verse is telling us and that’s why you are not answering my simple question, When the bible said “He that built all things”, was the church included there? PLEASE ANSWER THIS HONESTLY WITH YOUR HEART for the sake of the other souls.  

There is no issue? yet you have been defending that Christ built the church. How is that? <\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA:<\/strong> There is no issue. All things were and are created by God and by “God”, the Father and Jesus are both involved. What the Father owns and built, Jesus owns and built. Just read Heb. 3:6 which you avoided. It says Jesus owns the Church!
I can see your view on it. But your Binay-Noynoy comparison to God-Jesus doesn’t fit. Likewise inappropriate is Jesus being only a tool, a shovel. I wonder why you have no response to my comments on these. I have shown you my position. You can reread my post. If you can’t still see it at this time, maybe you will later. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

PLEASE ANSWER THIS HONESTLY WITH YOUR HEART for the sake of the other souls. <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

You want to portray your concern “of the other souls”. Is God saving all souls in this age?

I’m also waiting for the answers to these my 1 dare and 3 questions:

1. Now prove that the Father interacted with “the previous prophets”.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

2. Also, in your statement, “The mere fact that He sent us His son, for us to adhere on what He wants us to do, or simply His will, that was God’s interaction with us coz He wants us to be saved”, is saving the only purpose that God sent Jesus for man according to your enlightenment?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

3. Didn’t the Word shed off his God nature to become mortal?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

4. You’ve mentioned, unnecessarily in our exchanges, INC 2 times already. Do you have a quarrel with the INC?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria<\/strong>: <\/strong>Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

There is no issue. All things were and are created by God and by “God”, the Father and Jesus are both involved. What the Father owns and built, Jesus owns and built. Just read Heb. 3:6 which you avoided. It says Jesus owns the Church!

I can see your view on it. But your Binay-Noynoy comparison to God-Jesus doesn’t fit. Likewise inappropriate is Jesus being only a tool, a shovel. I wonder why you have no response to my comments on these. I have shown you my position. You can reread my post. If you can’t still see it at this time, maybe you will later.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Are you really sure that this is the doctrine of the Iglesia ni Manalo (coz it seems that you are offended when I use INC), that every thing that the Father built and owns, Jesus owns and built too? Coz the main reason we suppose why the church founded by Mr. Manalo was named CHURCH OF CHRIST is bcoz of the belief that it was Christ who built it, and that’s why you
guys always use and apparently your favorite, Matthew 16:18 “… upon this rock I wll build my church…” ryt? You even guys use Romans 16:16 (..all the churches of christ…) to emphasize that it was really Christ who built the church. 

Now you are telling us that whatever God built and owns, Jesus owns and built too.. OR MAYBE YOU HAVE JUST ACCEPTED AND LEARNED ON HEBREW 3:4 that you can’t disregard the clear verse that it was God who did build everythng, which obviously the church was included there. (which you cant answer\/accept directly) but still you insert the name of Christ on who really built the church just to rationalize your belief. 

I will answer with so much interest the Hebrew 3:6 which for you am avoiding it. I am just waiting you to answer first if the church was included in Hebrew 3:4 and you can’t directly answer it. Coz this topic won’t end if we’ll just gonna throw questions without answering first ryt?

so it seems that your now convinced that the church was included there in Heb.3:4 and accepting that the Father created everything, but still inserting Christ on who really built the church.

My next question is: 

where in the bible can you find that whatever God the Father built and owns, Jesus Christ built and owns too?<\/strong>

coz accdg. to
John 12:49 “For I have not spoken of myself, but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say,and what I should speak.”

In this verse,who owns the commandment?<\/strong> The Father owns the commandment ryt? Jesus was sent here to propagate His commandments for it is the key for salvation. If it is also owned by Jesus himself, he would have not said that, ryt?  

In the time of israelites, Jesus was not introduced then. MOses was the one whom God had chosen to give His commandments for them. Who owns those commandments?<\/strong>Moses doesn’t even know yet Jesus during that time for you to tell that it was also owned by Christ, and the fact that it was Chrst himself taught to the first christians that those were his Father’s 
commandments. 

how are you gonna explain then what you were saying that whatever the Father owns and built, Jesus owns and built too? which verse?<\/strong>

Now, to answer you bout Hebrew 3:6 (and for you am avoiding it, let’s see ), coz you are now admitting indirectly and cautiously that in Hebrew 3:4, yes, the Father built everythng including the church. 

Hebrew 3:6
“but Christ as a son, over his house; whose house are we, if we hold fast our boldness and the glorying of our hope firm unto the end.” (KJV)

OVER HIS HOUSE… his there doesn’t pertain to Christ, it pertains to the God the Father which accdg to Hebrew 3:4, the One who built everything. The bible does not contradict itself. It is contradicting when someone like you alters the real meaning of it. 

To prove that HIS is pertaining to the Father and not the son.
Let’s try other different versions of the bible.

Good news version (favorite translation of the INC’s)

HEBREW
1 My Christian friends, who also have been called by God<\/strong>! Think of Jesus, whom God<\/strong> sent to be the High Priest of the faith we profess.2 (A)He was faithful to God<\/strong>, who chose him to do this work, just as Moses was faithful in his work in God’s<\/strong> house.3 A man who builds a house receives more honor than the house itself. In the same way Jesus is worthy of much greater honor than Moses.4 Every house, of course, is built by someone\u00e2\u0080\u201dand God<\/strong> is the one who has built all things.5 Moses was faithful in God’s<\/strong> house as a servant, and he spoke of the things that God<\/strong> would say in the future.6 But Christ is faithful as the Son in charge of God’s<\/strong> house. We are his
house if we keep up our courage and our confidence in what we hope for.

English standard version

1Therefore, holy brothers,[a] you who share in(A) a heavenly calling, consider Jesus,(B) the apostle and high priest of our confession, 2who was faithful to him who appointed him,(C) just as Moses also was faithful in all God\u2019shouse.3For Jesus has been counted worthy of more glory than Moses\u2014as much more glory as the builder of a house has more honor than the house itself. 4(For every house is built by someone, but(D) the builder of all things is God.) 5(E) Now Moses was faithful in all God\u2019s house(F) as a servant,(G) to testify to the things that were to be spoken later, 6but Christ is faithful over [b]God\u2019s<\/strong> house as(H) a son. And(I) we are his house if indeed we(J) hold fast our confidence and our boasting in our hope.[c

It was clear ryt? It is pertaining to the house of God the Father. The house is the church accdg to the bible and Jesus is the head of the church. Romans 16:16 doesnt prove it was Jesus who built the church since you admit that there are 12 verses that say, CHURCH OF GOD. Yes, there is no problem calling it church of christ since the bible itself use that term 
but to conclude it was Jesus who built it, it’s diff, way different. It will contradict itself if that is the case. Jesus was sent to save the body, or the house, or the church and incharged to lead it. The fact that the bible says time comes, Jesus will gonna surrender the church to God. It shows that it was really God who owns it, and that’s not being disrespectful or demoting Jesus coz that is his real purpose or mission. To save the body which is the church. 
————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

You want to portray your concern “of the other souls”. Is God saving all souls in this age?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

– becoz false belief may lead you to hell..God does want everybody to be saved… unlike in INC, your doctrine is that INC’s are the only ones that will be saved.\u00a0So how bout the children that dont understand yet the bible?<\/strong>\u00a0They will get punished accdg. to your doctrine and how cruel is that!

is this a lie.. go watch this.
http:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=22S6ZjVjLQE<\/a>

answers:

1. To interact is to communicate. Moses is a good example. God had sent his commandments thru Moses.\u00a0\u00a0

2. Yes! Defintely! He was sent to propagate His words w\/c is the truth, bring them inside the church, primarily for salvation.\u00a0

3. So it is clear that you really believe that Christ is a man, or becomes a man? (the bible totally disputes your belief then:D )\u00a0and are you saying that Christ’s form of being a god has been taken away and become mortal? when and where was that in the bible?<\/strong>\u00a0\u00a0

4.Becoz I totally not agree with the so many doctrines of INC which will lead people to hell.

I have answered all your questions. Now it is your turn to answer mine.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA:<\/strong> howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Are you really sure that this is the doctrine of the Iglesia ni Manalo (coz it seems that you are offended when I use INC), that every thing that the Father built and owns, Jesus owns and built too? Coz the main reason we suppose why the church founded by Mr. Manalo was named CHURCH OF CHRIST is bcoz of the belief that it was Christ who built it, and that’s why you
guys always use and apparently your favorite, Matthew 16:18 “… upon this rock I wll build my church…” ryt? You even guys use Romans 16:16 (..all the churches of christ…) to emphasize that it was really Christ who built the church.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

You must be with the group which openly quarrels with the INC. You can’t detach from your words Manalo and the INC. 

I had a previous long discussion with revin, an INC member, and our discussion in an earlier thread was cordial. In the end, we agreed to leave our differences in understanding, particularly on whether Christ is only a man, to each other’s choice. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Now you are telling us that whatever God built and owns, Jesus owns and built too.. OR MAYBE YOU HAVE JUST ACCEPTED AND LEARNED ON HEBREW 3:4 that you can’t disregard the clear verse that it was God who did build everythng, which obviously the church was included there. (which you cant answer\/accept directly) but still you insert the name of Christ on who really built the church just to rationalize your belief. 

I will answer with so much interest the Hebrew 3:6 which for you am avoiding it. I am just waiting you to answer first if the church was included in Hebrew 3:4 and you can’t directly answer it. Coz this topic won’t end if we’ll just gonna throw questions without answering first ryt?

so it seems that your now convinced that the church was included there in Heb.3:4 and accepting that the Father created everything, but still inserting Christ on who really built the church.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

What I’m saying, not “telling” because I won’t care if you will not agree in the end, is that there is no point in making an issue as to the ownership and to who “really built” “all things” including the Church. There is no question that God owns and created all things. But “God” owning and creating “all things” does not exclude Jesus Christ, a God being in the God family who plans with the Father and executes the plan, who you want to exclude and be discredited. 

There are points raised which need to be reformed or be dismissed as a non-issue. Your pointing to God as the builder of the Church and not Christ falls in this category.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

My next question is:\u00a0

where in the bible can you find that whatever God the Father built and owns, Jesus Christ built and owns too?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

It’s obvious. God is a family. Don’t remove Jesus Christ from “God”.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

coz accdg. to

John 12:49 “For I have not spoken of myself, but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say,and what I should speak.”

In this verse,who owns the commandment?\u00a0The Father owns the commandment ryt? Jesus was sent here to propagate His commandments for it is the key for salvation. If it is also owned by Jesus himself, he would have not said that, ryt?\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

When the immortal Word became the mortal Jesus, the latter “could do nothing” and was totally dependent on the God being left in heaven, the Father. Jesus as a man on earth was directing man to the Father. But this doesn’t mean that Jesus lost his being part of the God family who co-planned everything with the Father.

So Jesus’ words in your quoted verse do not really remove Jesus’ co-ownership and co-authorship of the commandments.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the time of israelites, Jesus was not introduced then. MOses was the one whom God had chosen to give His commandments for them.\u00a0Who owns those commandments?\u00a0Moses doesn’t even know yet Jesus during that time for you to tell that it was also owned by Christ, and the fact that it was Chrst himself taught to the first christians that those were his Father’s\u00a0
commandments.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

And who do you think was the God who dealt with Moses? If you think it’s the Father, think again. 

I say it’s the God being who later became Jesus Christ. Saying “Jesus was not introduced then” is not correct.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

how are you gonna explain then what you were saying that whatever the Father owns and built, Jesus owns and built too? which verse?

Now, to answer you bout Hebrew 3:6 (and for you am avoiding it, let’s see\u00a0), coz you are now admitting indirectly and cautiously that in Hebrew 3:4, yes, the Father built everythng including the church.\u00a0

Hebrew 3:6
“but Christ as a son, over his house; whose house are we, if we hold fast our boldness and the glorying of our hope firm unto the end.” (KJV)

OVER HIS HOUSE… his there doesn’t pertain to Christ, it pertains to the God the Father which accdg to Hebrew 3:4, the One who built everything. The bible does not contradict itself. It is contradicting when someone like you alters the real meaning of it.\u00a0

To prove that HIS is pertaining to the Father and not the son.
Let’s try other different versions of the bible.

Good news version (favorite translation of the INC’s)

HEBREW
1 My Christian friends, who also have been called by\u00a0God<\/strong>! Think of Jesus, whom\u00a0God<\/strong>\u00a0sent to be the High Priest of the faith we profess.2 (A)He was faithful to\u00a0God<\/strong>, who chose him to do this work, just as Moses was faithful in his work in\u00a0God’s<\/strong>\u00a0house.3 A man who builds a house receives more honor than the house itself. In the same way Jesus is worthy of much greater honor than Moses.4 Every house, of course, is built by someone\u00e2\u0080\u201dand\u00a0God<\/strong>\u00a0is the one who has built all things.5 Moses was faithful in\u00a0God’s<\/strong> house as a servant, and he spoke of the things that\u00a0God<\/strong>\u00a0would say in the future.6 But Christ is faithful as the Son in charge of\u00a0God’s<\/strong>\u00a0house. We are his
house if we keep up our courage and our confidence in what we hope for.

English standard version

1Therefore, holy brothers,[a] you who share in(A) a heavenly calling, consider Jesus,(B) the apostle and high priest of our confession, 2who was faithful to him who appointed him,(C) just as Moses also was faithful in all God\u2019s house.3For Jesus has been counted worthy of more glory than Moses\u2014as much more glory as the builder of a house has more honor than the house itself. 4(For every house is built by someone, but(D) the builder of all things is God.) 5(E) Now Moses was faithful in all God\u2019s house(F) as a servant,(G) to testify to the things that were to be spoken later, 6but Christ is faithful over [b]God\u2019s<\/strong>\u00a0house as(H) a son. And(I) we are his house if indeed we(J) hold fast our confidence and our boasting in our hope.[c

It was clear ryt? It is pertaining to the house of God the Father. The house is the church accdg to the bible and Jesus is the head of the church. Romans 16:16 doesnt prove it was Jesus who built the church since you admit that there are 12 verses that say, CHURCH OF GOD. Yes, there is no problem calling it church of christ since the bible itself use that term\u00a0
but to conclude it was Jesus who built it, it’s diff, way different. It will contradict itself if that is the case. Jesus was sent to save the body, or the house, or the church and incharged to lead it. The fact that the bible says time comes, Jesus will gonna surrender the church to God. It shows that it was really God who owns it, and that’s not being disrespectful or demoting Jesus coz that is his real purpose or mission. To save the body which is the church.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

My comment above on the co-ownership and being co-builders of the Father and Jesus applies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

You did not respond to this question: You want to portray your concern “of the other souls”. Is God saving all souls in this age?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

To interact is to communicate. Moses is a good example. God had sent his commandments thru Moses. <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Your position is that the God who communicated with Moses is the Father. I ask for proof by the way.  

Mine is it was the being who became Jesus Christ. I gave you the reference to a thread but obviously you didn’t read it. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Yes! Defintely! He was sent to propagate His words w\/c is the truth, bring them inside the church, primarily for salvation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Primarily. Is there a secondary or more purpose?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

My understanding is that after saving a man from the eternal death penalty of sin, Jesus was to proceed with his creation of man in God’s image according to God’s likeness.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

And the fact that Christ was already with the Father since the beginning of everything, this shows that Jesus Christ is not human, coz INC’s like you believe that Christ is human ryt? (this is another issue anyway which we can also discuss some other time )<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Didn’t the Word shed off his God nature to become mortal?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

So it is clear that you really believe that Christ is a man, or becomes a man? (the bible totally disputes your belief then)<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is clear that the Spirit Word became mortal flesh. Instead of “the bible totally disputes” my belief, it “totally” supports it. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

and are you saying that Christ’s form of being a god has been taken away and become mortal? when and where was that in the bible?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

He was an immortal being but had to shed off immortality for the purpose of death. Otherwise, Christ would not have died. See Philippians 2 and Hebrews 2.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

– becoz false belief may lead you to hell..God does want everybody to be saved… unlike in INC, your doctrine is that INC’s are the only ones that will be saved.[b] So how bout the children that dont understand yet the bible? They will get punished accdg. to your doctrine and how cruel is that!<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is not “false belief may lead you to hell”. It is one’s choice as to whether one makes God to reign over him or not. If the choice is not, that man goes to the lake of fire for his life’s end (not being alive for eternity in pain).

Many will be saved and become finished creations of God in his image according to God’s likeness.

The children and the people who have since died without knowing God in this age will have their chance for salvation in the age which follows the next age.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Becoz I totally not agree with the so many doctrines of INC which will lead people to hell.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

God is in control. When Christ opens a man’s understanding, no other man’s or group’s doctrine could sway it away from the man.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria<\/strong>: <\/strong>just wait for my answer k!? too busy here!  got work all day. practice and actual competition for volleyball and basketball after. BUt yes, I would answer all your questions. <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA: <\/strong>Prayerful study might be of help. 

Actually, my questions to you, and these are becoming few, are to challenge your understanding just as I would welcome challenging questions to mine. Your responses might lead to better understanding which is really the object of Ephessians 4:11-13.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria<\/strong>: <\/strong>Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

You must be with the group which openly quarrels with the INC. You can’t detach from your words Manalo and the INC. 

I had a previous long discussion with revin, an INC member, and our discussion in an earlier thread was cordial. In the end, we agreed to leave our differences in understanding, particularly on whether Christ is only a man, to each other’s choice. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

—————————————-<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Yeah! and I am proud of that group coz no other group in the whole world that accurately teaches what the whole bible is saying than our group.  

And it is not only the INC that we fight, but rather all the religion that are injecting false beliefs to people. We are not against someone or somebody personally esp the members of diff group but we are against the wrong beliefs, lies, deceit that could lead people to eternal damnation.

Those religion that does not fight against these are not of God (just for the sake of saying that they are peaceful coz they dont criticise others). Why? becoz real christians, real people of God does have fight.  

Ephesians 6:12
“For we are not fighting against human beings but against the wicked spiritual forces in the heavenly world, the rulers, authorities, and cosmic powers of this dark age.”

— We can prove the Christ is not a man. There are lots of verses that prove this. Even without using the bible, logically speaking, he is the son of God, so he must be God. Carabao bears a baby carabao, dog bears a dog, God bears a god and not a man.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What I’m saying, not “telling” because I won’t care if you will not agree in the end, is that there is no point in making an issue as to the ownership and to who “really built” “all things” including the Church. There is no question that God owns and created all things. But “God” owning and creating “all things” does not exclude Jesus Christ, a God being in the God family who plans with the Father and executes the plan, who you want to exclude and be discredited. 

There are points raised which need to be reformed or be dismissed as a non-issue. Your pointing to God as the builder of the Church and not Christ falls in this category.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

—————————————-<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

There is no issue AGAIN as to who really built the church, yet your thread’s title is WHY CHRIST DID BUILD THE CHURCH.. You even use Romans 16:16 just to justify your belief that it was Christ. I gave you Hebrew 3:4 and yes, you have learned coz you obviously cant refute it that God built everything including the church. Then you WRONGLY USED HEBREW 3:6, believing that it was christ who owns the church. I gave you the other diff translations of that same verse you used to prove that it is your understanding that has problem and I convincingly showed you that it was God who owns and built the church. So, you cant REFUTE IT AND JUST ACCEPT THAT IT WAS REALLY GOD WHO REALLY BUILT AND OWNS THE CHURCH. But, still just not to let your belief be shamed, you keep on saying that there is no issue on who realy built the church coz what God owns and built, Christ built and owns also. I refute it coz Jesus himself said, the commandment, teachings that he was saying is from God which obviously means, God owns it coz Jesus should have not said that if he also owns that. Just like the commandments sent by God to Moises. 

John 12:49
“For I have not spoken of myself, but the Father which sent me, HE GAVE ME A COMMANDMENT, what I should say, and what I should speak.”
Your belief again that whatever God built and owns, Chrst built and owns too IS WRONG BIBLICALLY.  
— I am not excluding Christ. As Ive said, he has become the tool for the creation. Jesus founded the church, but God the Father was the one who established it. It’s different.  

— And to prove again that you are wrong for saying that Christ built the church. What if I say in the bible, church was already in existence even before Christ. How is that? 

— another one, you said the word “God” is composed of the Father and Christ. That’s where you got ur belief that if the Father built it, Christ also built it. AM I RYT?

question is.. where is that in the bible that a single entity\/word God is composed of two beings which is the Father and Christ? 

becoz the bible tells us, even Christ tells us that they are different or separate being.
Jesus even regards his Father as a SUPERIOR being than him.
proof?

John 14:28 
“….. I go unto the Father: for my Father is GREATER THAN I.”
You just need to accept that they are two different being and the Father is greater than Christ. It is not being disrespectful with Christ becoz he himself said it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It’s obvious. God is a family. Don’t remove Jesus Christ from “God”.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

—————————————-<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Then show your proof in the bible that that certain word “God” is a family that composed of the Father and Christ. I would be patient to wait for it. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

When the immortal Word became the mortal Jesus, the latter “could do nothing” and was totally dependent on the God being left in heaven, the Father. Jesus as a man on earth was directing man to the Father. But this doesn’t mean that Jesus lost his being part of the God family who co-planned everything with the Father.

So Jesus’ words in your quoted verse does not really remove Jesus’ co-ownership and co-authorship of the commandments.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

—————————————-<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Where in the bible proves that an immortal could become mortal?  Christ is an immortal being yes! but to say that he became mortal, AGAIN IT SHOWS INNOCENCE OF THE BIBLE. It is true that Christ manifested in flesh. It is written. He used a HUMAN BODY WHICH IS MORTAL BUT THE CHRIST THAT IS WITHIN THAT BODY REMAINS AND WILL REMAIN IMMORTAL.  Do I make sense? It is the same mortal body that was crucified and died. It’s ridiculous to think that Christ, the begotten son of God, existing even before everythng could just be killed by mortal humans. C’mon?  

Philippians 2:6-7
“Who, being in the form of God, though it not robbery to be equal with God.
But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the LIKENESS OF MEN.”

Christ that exists before everything WAS MADE IN THE LIKENESS OF MEN coz he is really not a man but a god. INC believes that Christ was born being a man, lives being a man, died being a man, and went through to his Father as a man which is wrong biblically. Chrst is not a man, but rather a god that used a human body. So, for you to tell that an immortal Christ became a mortal man is DEFINITELY WRONG BIBLICALLY.!

– Where in the bible that Jesus is the co-owner of the commandments? If he is the one who says it is his Father’s.  

“For I have not spoken of myself, but the Father which sent me, HE GAVE ME A COMMANDMENT, what I should say, and what I should speak.”

It’s unreasonable for Christ to say this if he also owns the commandment. He wouldn’t have said his Father gave him the commandment if he also owns it. Logic.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

And who do you think was the God who dealt with Moses? If you think it’s the Father, think again. 

I say it’s the God being who later became Jesus Christ. Saying “Jesus was not introduced then” is not correct<\/p>\n\n\n\n

—————————————-<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Too basic. The bible said, noone ever spoke to God the Father. Noone ever heareth His audible voice, but when I say God interacts or communicates to Moises, God used His angel. God is too powerful for a human to talk with directly. Proof? Man had stumbled when an angel spoke. That was the power of the voice of an angel how much more of God. And God has diff means to interact with people He had chosen. It could also be thru dreams.  
Apostles’ and Jesus’ propagation of His words is God’s interaction to men. 
So if your belief is God cant interact with men, THINK AGAIN!  

— Then show any proof in the bible that Jesus was already introduced during the time of Moises. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

You want to portray your concern “of the other souls”. Is God saving all souls in this age? You did not respond to this question.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

— Then I will now.  
— God does want to save all men, as in all.

I Timothy 2:4 
“Who wants everyone to be saved and to come to know the truth.”

But what soul are you referring to? if you pertain to men, He wants to save all men but He is not saving all men in this age esp those men who inject belief that are blatantly opposite that of His teachings. If you pertain to the spirit of those who died, they will be judged along wth the other living men come judgement day.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Now prove that the Father interacted with “the previous prophets”.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

To interact is to communicate. Moses is a good example. God had sent his commandments thru Moses. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Your position is that the God who communicated with Moses is the Father. I ask for proof by the way.  

Mine is it was the being who became Jesus Christ. I gave you the reference to a thread but obviously you didn’t read it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

—————————————-<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I just answered this. I said, God communicates with Moises coz how could Moises be able to tell people what God wants them to do. But if you were saying that I said, God spoke directly to Moises, it’s different, and I have never said that. It is basic, no man heareth yet His voice. 

-BEING BECAME A JESUS CHRIST? and who was that being that became JESUS CHRIST? That is somethig new!  ok! where is that in the bible?  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Primarily. Is there a secondary or more purpose?

My understanding is that after saving a man from the eternal death penalty of sin, Jesus’ was to proceed with his creation of man in God’s image according to God’s likeness.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

—————————————-<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

yup that’s his sole purpose, for our salvation. He descended to propagate his Father’s words for us to know the truth for SALVATION. He died for the body to redeem it from sins TO SAVE it. It is what the bible is saying. Good will be SAVED, evil will be damned. God wants us to be SAVED, and so He sent us His son.  

— Jesus’ was to proceed with his creation of man in God’s image according to God’s likeness????? where is this in the bible?  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is clear that the Spirit Word became mortal flesh. Instead of “the bible totally disputes” my belief, it “totally” supports it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

—————————————-<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

it is vague that the word became mortal flesh. The word is god, and that word is pertaining to Christ who was wth the Father in the beginning.

John 1:1
“In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was god.”
aren’t you the one who is demoting Chrst from being a god to mortal man?  

although some translation use the word “became man”, some use “was made flesh” but the tagalog translation is the most correct by saying “nagkatawang-tao”

The word which is Christ did not become man (ever after) from being a god which is apparently your belief. He used a body of a man. That man was the mortal, flesh that had been killed and crucified. BUt the Christ that’s within that body is still the begotten son of God which is a god that’s immortal. The tagalog word is rightful, NAGKATAWANG TAO. Si Cristo na dios ay nagkatawang tao. What is the man\/tao? the body or the katawan. Why did Christ need to use a katwan\/body? becoz he is a spirit and a god. Can a spirit or god then be killed by crucifixion? Think again!   

It’s like a man who wore a robot suit. The man didnt become totally a robot. The robot is the suit, but what’s inside that suit is still a man.  

The proof that Chrst even when he used a human body or flesh, is still a god and not man.

JOhn 20:28 
“And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.” (pertaining to Jesus)
Titus 2:13
“Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great GOD AND OUR SAVIOUR Jesus Christ.”

so for the apostles and us, Jesus Chrst though manifested in flesh is still a god, but for you and the INC’s, he is just man.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

He was an immortal being but had to shed of immortality for the purpose of death. Otherwise, Christ would not have died. See Philippians 2 and Hebrews 2.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I have already answered this. Why dont you post the exact verses as your basis. Let’s see and analyze.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is not “false belief may lead you to hell”. It is one’s choice as to whether one makes God to reign over him or not. If the choice is not, that man goes to the lake of fire for his life’s end (not being alive for eternity in pain).

Many will be saved and become finished creations of God in his image according to God’s likeness.
The children and the people who have since died without knowing God in this age will have their chance for salvation in the age which follows the next age.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

—————————————-<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

false belief may lead you to hell is biblical. That’s the reason why Jesus and the apostles had preached the truth of God, to battle which is false and lies. Becoz those lies are of satan.
And false blind preachers preaching lies are rampant. What will gonna happen to their blinded members with same false beliefs?

Matthew 15:14
“Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into ditch.”  

And what if a person thinks what he is doing is right? for example the worship of a graven image. for him he is serving God. 
but what does the bible say to those who worship graven image?

for some religious group, killing their enemy is just right for their sugo?
but what does the bible say if you kill?

there are things which are right for us, but totally it is not but the opposite.

Proverbs 14:12
“There is a way which seemeth right for a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.”

Lies, false beliefs are of satan and no one can be saved having them but will lead you to hell. agreed?  

That’s the reason why God is fair enough that He wants His words to be known by the whole world before the judgement day, coz His words are the truth that would lead people to His kingdom.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

God is in control. When Christ opens a man’s understanding, no other man’s or group’s doctrine could sway the man.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Just hope that God would open your understanding. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria<\/strong>: <\/strong>Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Prayerful study might be of help. 

Actually, my questions to you, and these are becoming few, are to challenge your understanding just as I would welcome challenging questions to mine. Your responses might lead to better understanding which is really the object of Ephessians 4:11-13.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Just answer my questions and I will answer yours even it is not few.  
Remember that you WRONGLY USED HEBREW 3:6 believing that it was Jesus who owns the house on the verse. I used the INC’s favorite translation and it proved you wrong.  

Just try to search my other religious posts using my username and I dont need to study anymore coz I have already or rather we have already studied this several years ago and the topic is not even new to us. Let’s just answer all the questions using the bible regardless of when do we like to answer. We don’t know each other personally so just respect when is the best time we could give response. ayt!?  

Just want to tell you that am just a typical member of the group you are thnking. That’s for sure! <\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA:<\/strong> howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Just answer my questions and I will answer yours even it is not few.  
Remember that you WRONGLY USED HEBREW 3:6 believing that it was Jesus who owns the house on the verse. I used the INC’s favorite translation and it proved you wrong. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Not wrongly used. My position remains that whatever God owns and built Christ owns and built because Christ is part of the God family. You said Christ is just like Binay in the Binay-Noynoy team or just a tool is what is wrong. Christ is God as the Father is (John 1:1).

In the OT where the Word was not yet the man Jesus Christ, there is no distinction in “God”. This is the reason why you mistakenly said it was the Father who dealt with Moses. It is only in the NT where “God” is referred to the Father because Jesus was pointing men to the Father. But the Word’s becoming flesh didn’t make Jesus no longer part of “God” where credit to being the builder of the Church would be viewed as wrong.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Just try to search my other religious posts using my username and I dont need to study anymore coz I have already or rather we have already studied this several years ago and the topic is not even new to us. Let’s just answer all the questions using the bible regardless of when do we like to answer. We don’t know each other personally so just respect when is the best time we could give response. ayt!? <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I don’t find any reason to read your “other religious posts” because I’m not being enlightened by your posts as you bragged at first. If you think you have no more need to study, then you think you already attained that level of knowledge where Christ is which is preposterous.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Just want to tell you that am just a typical member of the group you are thnking. That’s for sure! <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Then I think you have yet a lot to learn and needs to study more as I do.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA:<\/strong> howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

—<\/strong>Yeah! and I am proud of that group coz no other group in the whole world that accurately teaches what the whole bible is saying than our group. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Of course it’s obvious it is only your group which teaches your own beliefs. But don’t you members examine what your teachers teach? I used to watch ADD programs because of some similarities with my beliefs. I stopped when the broadcaster mentioned about man going to heaven and that this age is the only age of salvation.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

And it is not only the INC that we fight, but rather all the religion that are injecting false beliefs to people. We are not against someone or somebody personally esp the members of diff group but we are against the wrong beliefs, lies, deceit that could lead people to eternal damnation.

Those religion that does not fight against these are not of God (just for the sake of saying that they are peaceful coz they dont criticise others). Why? becoz real christians, real people of God does have fight.  

Ephesians 6:12
“For we are not fighting against human beings but against the wicked spiritual forces in the heavenly world, the rulers, authorities, and cosmic powers of this dark age.”

—<\/strong> We can prove the Christ is not a man. There are lots of verses that prove this. Even without using the bible, logically speaking, he is the son of God, so he must be God. Carabao bears a baby carabao, dog bears a dog, God bears a god and not a man. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I don’t “fight” the others who profess belief in the bible. God is in control and could always lead people he chooses to be part of the Church in this age. The Christian’s fight is more of his overcoming the tests for him to develop in him LOVE which is God’s nature.

As to your dare that you “can prove the Christ is not a man”, try to comment in the thread, “To bible believers, did Christ really die?” in this link: viewtopic.php?f=20&t=112287<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Now you are telling us that whatever God built and owns, Jesus owns and built too.. OR MAYBE YOU HAVE JUST ACCEPTED AND LEARNED ON HEBREW 3:4 that you can’t disregard the clear verse that it was God who did build everythng, which obviously the church was included there. (which you cant answer\/accept directly) but still you insert the name of Christ on who really built the church just to rationalize your belief. 

I will answer with so much interest the Hebrew 3:6 which for you am avoiding it. I am just waiting you to answer first if the church was included in Hebrew 3:4 and you can’t directly answer it. Coz this topic won’t end if we’ll just gonna throw questions without answering first ryt?

so it seems that your now convinced that the church was included there in Heb.3:4 and accepting that the Father created everything, but still inserting Christ on who really built the church.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

If my stand still doesn’t get across to you that the question as to who owns and who built the Church between the Father and Jesus is a non-issue, then it wouldn’t. It’s not a problem to me.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Between the two beings who co-planned the building of the Church from the foundation of the world, I place Jesus as the actual builder of the Church. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

–There is no issue AGAIN as to who really built the church, yet your thread’s title is WHY CHRIST DID BUILD THE CHURCH.. You even use Romans 16:16 just to justify your belief that it was Christ. I gave you Hebrew 3:4 and yes, you have learned coz you obviously cant refute it that God built everything including the church. Then you WRONGLY USED HEBREW 3:6, believing that it was christ who owns the church. I gave you the other diff translations of that same verse you used to prove that it is your understanding that has problem and I convincingly showed you that it was God who owns and built the church. So, you cant REFUTE IT AND JUST ACCEPT THAT IT WAS REALLY GOD WHO REALLY BUILT AND OWNS THE CHURCH. But, still just not to let your belief be shamed, you keep on saying that there is no issue on who realy built the church coz what God owns and built, Christ built and owns also. I refute it coz Jesus himself said, the commandment, teachings that he was saying is from God which obviously means, God owns it coz Jesus should have not said that if he also owns that. Just like the commandments sent by God to Moises.\u00a0
John 12:49
“For I have not spoken of myself, but the Father which sent me, HE GAVE ME A COMMANDMENT, what I should say, and what I should speak.”

Your belief again that whatever God built and owns, Chrst built and owns too IS WRONG BIBLICALLY.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I’ve explained the difference in contexts which you apparently couldn’t accept. If it is your stand that whatever Christ says in every situation is not really his and is of the Father, then you are the one in error. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

— I am not excluding Christ. As Ive said, he has become the tool for the creation. Jesus founded the church, but God the Father was the one who established it. It’s different. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Jesus as a “tool” is to me repulsive. 

Now show that “It’s different” the founding and establishment of the Church.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

— And to prove again that you are wrong for saying that Christ built the church. What if I say in the bible, church was already in existence even before Christ. How is that?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Strange to me. Show it and I’ll comment.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

—<\/strong> another one, you said the word “God” is composed of the Father and Christ. That’s where you got ur belief that if the Father built it, Christ also built it. AM I RYT?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Right.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

question is.. where is that in the bible that a single entity\/word God is composed of two beings which is the Father and Christ?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Back to basics.

Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth…26 Then God said, \u201cLet Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness;

I think you are familiar with John 1:1.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

becoz the bible tells us, even Christ tells us that they are different or separate being.
Jesus even regards his Father as a SUPERIOR being than him.
proof?

John 14:28\u00a0
“….. I go unto the Father: for my Father is GREATER THAN I.”

You just need to accept that they are two different being and the Father is greater than Christ.\u00a0\u00a0It is not being disrespectful with Christ becoz he himself said it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

When Christ uttered the words in John 14:28, he, the Word, already became flesh, a mortal being having shed off his God nature of being immortal.

Btw, are the words Jesus spoke in your quoted verse also the Father’s?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

— Then show your proof in the bible that that certain word “God” is a family that composed of the Father and Christ. I would be patient to wait for it. <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

There is one “God”. And this “God” is composed of two beings referred to as “God” and the Word who is also “God”. 

The description “family” of the unity of the beings composing “God” is used to enable man to grasp it. There is a father and a son. There is a family in heaven.

Ephesians 3:14 For this reason I bow my knees to the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, 15 from whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named…<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

–Where in the bible proves that an immortal could become mortal?  <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I’ve pointed out Philippians 2 and Hebrews 2 which I think you have already read. But you can read again and understand in the light of the other passages. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Christ is an immortal being yes! but to say that he became mortal, AGAIN IT SHOWS INNOCENCE OF THE BIBLE. It is true that Christ manifested in flesh. It is written. He used a HUMAN BODY WHICH IS MORTAL BUT THE CHRIST THAT IS WITHIN THAT BODY REMAINS AND WILL REMAIN IMMORTAL.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The word used is “became”. There is a change from spirit to flesh.

John 1:14 And the Word became flesh…

Your group’s belief that “He used a HUMAN BODY WHICH IS MORTAL BUT THE CHRIST THAT IS WITHIN THAT BODY REMAINS AND WILL REMAIN IMMORTAL” will simply mean that Christ did not die. This is what is clearly not biblical. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Do I make sense? <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Not to me in this case.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is the same mortal body that was crucified and died. It’s ridiculous to think that Christ, the begotten son of God, existing even before everythng could just be killed by mortal humans. C’mon? <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

What is ridiculous is your proposition that, in reality, Christ did not really die.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Philippians 2:6-7
“Who, being in the form of God, though it not robbery to be equal with God.
But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the LIKENESS OF MEN.”

Christ that exists before everything WAS MADE IN THE LIKENESS OF MEN coz he is really not a man but a god. INC believes that Christ was born being a man, lives being a man, died being a man, and went through to his Father as a man which is wrong biblically. Chrst is not a man, but rather a god that used a human body. So, for you to tell that an immortal Christ became a mortal man is DEFINITELY WRONG BIBLICALLY.!<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Hebrews 2:9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels, for the suffering of death crowned with glory and honor, that He, by the grace of God, might taste death for everyone.

You need to reexamine your belief that “Chrst is not a man, but rather a god that used a human body” if you want to grow in understanding.

The key word is “became” which connotes a change. This same word, “became”, was used when flesh and blood Christ was restored to his former nature of being a spirit at his resurrection.

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1 Corinthians 15:45 And so it is written, \u201cThe first man Adam became a living being.\u201d The last Adam (Jesus) became a life-giving spirit. 

This change from flesh and blood to spirit is the real object of God’s creating man in his image according to his likeness.

1 Corinthians 15:50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; nor does corruption inherit incorruption. 51 Behold, I tell you a mystery: We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed\u2014 52 in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. 53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

http:\/\/forum.philboxing.com\/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=185726&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=300<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

– Where in the bible that Jesus is the co-owner of the commandments? If he is the one who says it is his Father’s.  

“For I have not spoken of myself, but the Father which sent me, HE GAVE ME A COMMANDMENT, what I should say, and what I should speak.”

It’s unreasonable for Christ to say this if he also owns the commandment. He wouldn’t have said his Father gave him the commandment if he also owns it. Logic. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is even you who said God gave the commandments to Moses. And you think that that “God” was the Father. I say, the “God” who gave the commandments to Moses is the being who became Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

— <\/strong>Too basic. The bible said, noone ever spoke to God the Father. Noone ever heareth His audible voice, but when I say God interacts or communicates to Moises, God used His angel. God is too powerful for a human to talk with directly. Proof? Man had stumbled when an angel spoke. That was the power of the voice of an angel how much more of God. And God has diff means to interact with people He had chosen. It could also be thru dreams.  
Apostles’ and Jesus’ propagation of His words is God’s interaction to men. 

So if your belief is God cant interact with men, THINK AGAIN!  

— Then show any proof in the bible that Jesus was already introduced during the time of Moises. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

It was you who said that the Father interacted with men in the OT. You just changed your statement that God interacted through angels.

Jesus as a human is the same being who was the God known in the OT times. He is the being Adam and Eve, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Israel, Moses, etc. knew as God.

John 8:56 Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it and was glad.\u201d 
57 Then the Jews said to Him, \u201cYou are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?\u201d 
58 Jesus said to them, \u201cMost assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

— Then I will now.  
— God does want to save all men, as in all.

I Timothy 2:4 
“Who wants everyone to be saved and to come to know the truth.”

But what soul are you referring to? if you pertain to men, He wants to save all men but He is not saving all men in this age esp those men who inject belief that are blatantly opposite that of His teachings.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Soul is man. This is my position as to salvation. God will save all men from the penalty of death including “those men who inject belief that are blatantly opposite to that of His teachings”. Not all in this age but in the age after the next age.

After saving a soul from the power of death, God will give the soul\/man the Holy Spirit to be able to understand God. After man already knows who God is and what his purpose is, the soul will choose whether to make God his ruler or not. If he chooses God to reign over him, the man will be changed to spirit and live forever. Otherwise, God will slay him and the soul dies, unconscious, forever.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

If you pertain to the spirit of those who died, they will be judged along wth the other living men come judgement day.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I have an idea of your understanding of “judgment day”. For the sake of discussion and the others who are following this thread, please state what transpires during the white throne “judgment” according to your enlightenment. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

— I just answered this. I said, God communicates with Moises coz how could Moises be able to tell people what God wants them to do. But if you were saying that I said, God spoke directly to Moises, it’s different, and I have never said that. It is basic, no man heareth yet His voice.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

You said God interacted with the former prophets. And you believe it was the Father and not Jesus Christ who did.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

-BEING BECAME A JESUS CHRIST? and who was that being that became JESUS CHRIST? That is somethig new! ok! where is that in the bible? <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

John 1:14 And the Word became flesh…<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

— yup that’s his sole purpose, for our salvation. He descended to propagate his Father’s words for us to know the truth for SALVATION. He died for the body to redeem it from sins TO SAVE it. It is what the bible is saying. Good will be SAVED, evil will be damned. God wants us to be SAVED, and so He sent us His son. <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

To say that Jesus’ purpose is merely “for our salvation” is incomplete. There is much more to do for Jesus and the Father after man is saved from the penalty of death.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

— Jesus’ was to proceed with his creation of man in God’s image according to God’s likeness????? where is this in the bible? <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I don’t think you would want to learn more because you said you already have all the knowledge there is to learn.  

But for those who might want to, the thread is “God is Creating Man \u2013 the Overlooked Main Bible Theme”, 
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=174014<\/a>

I’ve translated these into:

Binisaya: Gihimo pa sa Diyos ang Tawo \u2013 Ang Wala Himatikding Tema sa Biblia 
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=180520<\/a>

Tagalog: Ginagawa pa ng Diyos ang Tao \u2013 Ang Nakaligtaang pinaka tema ng Biblia
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=180523<\/a> <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

— it is vague that the word became mortal flesh. The word is god, and that word is pertaining to Christ who was wth the Father in the beginning.

John 1:1
“In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was god.”

aren’t you the one who is demoting Chrst from being a god to mortal man?  

although some translation use the word “became man”, some use “was made flesh” but the tagalog translation is the most correct by saying “nagkatawang-tao”

The word which is Christ did not become man (ever after) from being a god which is apparently your belief. He used a body of a man. That man was the mortal, flesh that had been killed and crucified. BUt the Christ that’s within that body is still the begotten son of God which is a god that’s immortal. The tagalog word is rightful, NAGKATAWANG TAO. Si Cristo na dios ay nagkatawang tao. What is the man\/tao? the body or the katawan. Why did Christ need to use a katwan\/body? becoz he is a spirit and a god. Can a spirit or god then be killed by crucifixion? Think again!   

It’s like a man who wore a robot suit. The man didnt become totally a robot. The robot is the suit, but what’s inside that suit is still a man.  

The proof that Chrst even when he used a human body or flesh, is still a god and not man.

JOhn 20:28 
“And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.” (pertaining to Jesus)

Titus 2:13
“Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great GOD AND OUR SAVIOUR Jesus Christ.”

so for the apostles and us, Jesus Chrst though manifested in flesh is still a god, but for you and the INC’s, he is just man. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

In short, to you Christ did not die. Man is still in his sins.

Your position has been forwarded by a poster in an old thread to which a poster with the username “marcus” responded that if it were so, then God “cheated”. I couldn’t agree more to marcus’ observation.

The thread, “To bible believers, Did Christ really die”, would be of help to those who want to be challenged in their beliefs.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I have already answered this. Why dont you post the exact verses as your basis. Let’s see and analyze.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Your answer doesn’t fit. To not digress the issue in this thread and to repeat what had already been discussed, just go to the thread, “To bible believers, did Christ really die?” in this link: viewtopic.php?f=20&t=112287<\/a> <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

— false belief may lead you to hell is biblical. That’s the reason why Jesus and the apostles had preached the truth of God, to battle which is false and lies. Becoz those lies are of satan.
And false blind preachers preaching lies are rampant. What will gonna happen to their blinded members with same false beliefs?

Matthew 15:14
“Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into ditch.”  

And what if a person thinks what he is doing is right? for example the worship of a graven image. for him he is serving God. 
but what does the bible say to those who worship graven image?

for some religious group, killing their enemy is just right for their sugo?
but what does the bible say if you kill?

there are things which are right for us, but totally it is not but the opposite.

Proverbs 14:12
“There is a way which seemeth right for a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.”

Lies, false beliefs are of satan and no one can be saved having them but will lead you to hell. agreed?  

That’s the reason why God is fair enough that He wants His words to be known by the whole world before the judgement day, coz His words are the truth that would lead people to His kingdom.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

God is not saving all men in this age. Those who he has in mind to be part of the team under Christ in the government of God after this age will be drawn to Christ including those who are now having the “false beliefs”. 

God is in control. God can draw to Christ that man he wants to grant repentance to in this age. The example of the Christian persecutor Saul illustrates this point.

And the white throne “judgment” is not only the rendition of the verdict where men would be but a period of opening their minds to understanding God. Then by their works where they already were given the Holy Spirit, their choice, they will be judged.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Just hope that God would open your understanding. <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

More understanding to be exact. I’m striving for more understanding. And you should also. 

But it is every man’s choice to believe whether or not he already has all the knowledge there is to learn. 

2 Peter 3:18 but grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

The standard of knowledge one needs to attain is that of Christ which I admit I’m still far away.

Ephesians 4:11 And He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers, 12 for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, 13 till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ…

Didn’t you just say your group is already there? <\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria<\/strong>: <\/strong>Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Of course it’s obvious it is only your group which teaches your own beliefs. But don’t you members examine what your teachers teach? I used to watch ADD programs because of some similarities with my beliefs. I stopped when the broadcaster mentioned about man going to heaven and that this age is the only age of salvation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

** what about that man going to heaven? what is that? could you please elaborate it. This is the only age of salvation? explain it further pls. coz obviously, how about those peple who lived thousands of years ago. We are not like INC that already condemned those people outside their religion. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I don’t “fight” the others who profess belief in the bible. God is in control and could always lead people he chooses to be part of the Church in this age. The Christian’s fight is more of his overcoming the tests for him to develop in him LOVE which is God’s nature.
As to your dare that you “can prove the Christ is not a man”, try to comment in the thread, “To bible believers, did Christ really die?” in this link: viewtopic.php?f=20&t=112287<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

** You don’t fight but the real Christians just like the apostles do. Our group won’t stop fighting by preaching the true words of God. We are actually the only group that believes in the bible that entertains any questions from diff people of diff faith. That is a fact. And by doing so, it is a form of a fight against false beliefs. To tell people that asking money from diff people even in the market, streets etc using the name of God like those of the born again is a fight against that money-making and unbiblical teaching. Telling people that to kill in any aspect or reason is against God is fighting the belief of other group that killing the enemy for their sugo is just fine. Propagating the truth of God is fighting the lies of false preachers. And this is exacty what the verse is telling us. By simply telling your friend not to cheat with his wife is fighting the sin of adultery, the wickedness which is from satan  

** God is not in control for now but in the future yes He is the supreme being that would end as victorous ofcorz. How can we say He is in control for now amidst all the war, bombings, killings, adultery. Those are the things of Satan and definitely God doesn’t want that. God wants to control us that’s for sure. He wants everything that is good for us. Just like a father to his son or daughter, but sometimes they themselves are the ones who do things out of their own will and not of God. That’s why His words, the truth need to intervene to control us. 

** I agree we need to bear all the temptations and adhere always to His words til our last breath for us to prove to Him that we are worthy of entering His kingdom,

Matthew 24:13
“But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.”

but there are two forces that exist on earth, it is good and evil and people of God have a fight, as it is written (and not only my opinion ) a fight against wickednes and forces of evil.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

If my stand still doesn’t get across to you that the question as to who owns and who built the Church between the Father and Jesus is a non-issue, then it wouldn’t. It’s not a problem to me.

Between the two beings who co-planned the building of the Church from the foundation of the world, I place Jesus as the actual builder of the Church. .<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

** YOU place Jesus as the actual builder of the church but for Hebrew 3:4 it was the Father who built the church. 

“For every house is builded by some man; but He that BUILT ALL THINGS IS GOD.”  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I’ve explained the difference in contexts which you apparently couldn’t accept. If it is your stand that whatever Christ says in every situation is not really his and is of the Father, then you are the one in error.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

** Did I say in every situation that Christ says, it was the Father?\u00a0I knew this is what you’re gonna think though, but I know I didnt say that. Becoz the verse I have given you was referring to the commandments Father had given to Christ. So whatever teachings\/commandments Christ had preached or told them, those were from the Father.\u00a0basa!

John 12:49
“For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I don’t think the bible is in error.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Now show that “It’s different” the founding and establishment of the Church.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

** Foundation is the act of starting an institution or organization, etc. In speaking of the church, it was already established by God even before Christ (which I will give you the verse later ), but Christ was the one who founded it or started it to introduce to the people during his time. . God built it even before Christ, but when the time Christ needed to descend from heaven to bring back in the people from God’s righteouness, he founded\/introduced the church. That’s why the name of our church is….

members of the Church of God in Christ Jesus the pillar and ground of truth.

So just and rightful biblically. So proud.  

** HOw bout you? what is the name of your church?  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Strange to me. Show it and I’ll comment. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

**I know it is strange to you. coz what I have told you, no other group that teaches the bible rightfully than our group.  

I will show it ofcorz. I will continue this. It’s better if you will not gonna reply back first coz it is unfair to you that I havent answered yet all your queries. ayt!?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA:<\/strong> howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

** what about that man going to heaven? what is that? could you please elaborate it. This is the only age of salvation? explain it further pls. coz obviously, how about those peple who lived thousands of years ago. We are not like INC that already condemned those people outside their religion. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I watched the telecast years ago and it could have been an old recorded program because your leader looked younger then. But I might be able to recall by your answering these questions with a yes or no: 
1. Your belief is that man will go to heaven; and
2. Your belief is that judgment of all men will be made when Christ returns.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

And it is not only the INC that we fight, but rather all the religion that are injecting false beliefs to people. We are not against someone or somebody personally esp the members of diff group but we are against the wrong beliefs, lies, deceit that could lead people to eternal damnation.

Those religion that does not fight against these are not of God (just for the sake of saying that they are peaceful coz they dont criticise others). Why? becoz real christians, real people of God does have fight.  

Ephesians 6:12
“For we are not fighting against human beings but against the wicked spiritual forces in the heavenly world, the rulers, authorities, and cosmic powers of this dark age.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

We differ. Your position is offensive. Ephesians 6 is defensive which is my position.

Ephesians 6:10 Finally, my brethren, be strong in the Lord and in the power of His might. 11 Put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. 12 For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places. 13 Therefore take up the whole armor of God, that you may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand. 
14 Stand therefore, having girded your waist with truth, having put on the breastplate of righteousness, 15 and having shod your feet with the preparation of the gospel of peace; 16 above all, taking the shield of faith with which you will be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked one. 17 And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God; 18 praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, being watchful to this end with all perseverance and supplication for all the saints\u2014

A Christian is not provocative and answers only when asked in humility the bible describes as “with meekness and fear”.

1 Peter 3:15 But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts, and always be ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you, with meekness and fear…<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

** You don’t fight but the real Christians just like the apostles do. Our group won’t stop fighting by preaching the true words of God. We are actually the only group that believes in the bible that entertains any questions from diff people of diff faith. That is a fact. And by doing so, it is a form of a fight against false beliefs. To tell people that asking money from diff people even in the market, streets etc using the name of God like those of the born again is a fight against that money-making and unbiblical teaching. Telling people that to kill in any aspect or reason is against God is fighting the belief of other group that killing the enemy for their sugo is just fine. Propagating the truth of God is fighting the lies of false preachers. And this is exacty what the verse is telling us. By simply telling your friend not to cheat with his wife is fighting the sin of adultery, the wickedness which is from satan <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Preaching what you believe and answering questions are not fighting. Correcting publicly others who are preaching their beliefs is provocative and will lead to conflict. And this is minding another’s business. Correcting a person’s belief is only proper when one asks for it or he is one of your group.

Committing sin and violations of penal laws are another matters.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

** God is not in control for now but in the future yes<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This belief is clearly erroneous. God would not be God if he “is not in control for now”. While he is allowing Satan to be god in this age, God is in control precisely by allowing Satan to finish his administrative duties on earth. God can limit how far Satan could go as in the case of Job and he can intervene anytime in man’s affairs as he sees fit. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

He is the supreme being that would end as victorous ofcorz. How can we say He is in control for now amidst all the war, bombings, killings, adultery. Those are the things of Satan and definitely God doesn’t want that. God wants to control us that’s for sure. He wants everything that is good for us. Just like a father to his son or daughter, but sometimes they themselves are the ones who do things out of their own will and not of God. That’s why His words, the truth need to intervene to control us.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Satan is having a field day only because God is allowing man to be independent of God. Through Adam and Eve, man chose to be free from God’s control and protection.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

** I agree we need to bear all the temptations and adhere always to His words til our last breath for us to prove to Him that we are worthy of entering His kingdom,

Matthew 24:13
“But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.”

but there are two forces that exist on earth, it is good and evil and people of God have a fight, as it is written (and not only my opinion ) a fight against wickednes and forces of evil.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

My position is that the fight is not to prove that the Christian is “worthy of entering His kingdom”. Of his own might a man can never prove his worth. It is the attitude which matters. The overcoming attitude of always choosing the way of God in all circumstances which test the Christian\u2019s submission to the rule of God over his life. With this kind of attitude, Christ supplies what\u2019s wanting.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

** YOU place Jesus as the actual builder of the church but for Hebrew 3:4 it was the Father who built the church. 

“For every house is builded by some man; but He that BUILT ALL THINGS IS GOD.” <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

You can reread my statement quoted above.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

** Did I say in every situation that Christ says, it was the Father? I knew this is what you’re gonna think though, but I know I didnt say that. Becoz the verse I have given you was referring to the commandments Father had given to Christ. So whatever teachings\/commandments Christ had preached or told them, those were from the Father. basa!

John 12:49
“For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak.”

I don’t think the bible is in error. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

What is in error is your belief that the God being who handed down the ten commandments to Moses was the Father and not Jesus Christ.

I’ve given my position that Jesus, having divested his own power as a result of becoming flesh and mortal, was always pointing and giving credit to the Father. As Jesus stated, of his self, he could do nothing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

** Foundation is the act of starting an institution or organization, etc. In speaking of the church, it was already established by God even before Christ (which I will give you the verse later ), but Christ was the one who founded it or started it to introduce to the people during his time. . God built it even before Christ, but when the time Christ needed to descend from heaven to bring back in the people from God’s righteouness, he founded\/introduced the church. That’s why the name of our church is….

members of the Church of God in Christ Jesus the pillar and ground of truth.

So just and rightful biblically. So proud.  

** HOw bout you? what is the name of your church? <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The thesaurus in my laptop lists the words “found” and “establish” as synonymous. 

I’ll comment on your statements and give you the name of the Church in which I’m a part of after you read the thread, “Where is the Church Jesus Built?” viewtopic.php?f=20&t=158517<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

**I know it is strange to you.  coz what I have told you, no other group that teaches the bible rightfully than our group. <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

“Strange” as in biblically foreign in my view. Make sure you specify “before church was already in existence even before Christ”. But I won’t mind if you delay in your response. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I will show it ofcorz. I will continue this. It’s better if you will not gonna reply back first coz it is unfair to you that I havent answered yet all your queries. ayt!?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I won’t think its unfair to me. Take your time. 

I’m responding to prevent backlogs. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria<\/strong>: <\/strong>I don’t need to study this specific topic as who built the church coz I am satisfied already the way our leader had explained to us this particular topic. Everything is so biblical.

You are just over reacting. Words of God, His wisdom is undeniably deep and broad. That’s why there is a chosen one, a leader that could decipher the wisdom of God biblically. Coz we admit, if it is only us, we can’t simply understand it. The reason why we stopped worshipping idols, and the other things God had prohibited, it was becoz we had just been taught and enlightened. And the reason why we always have a congregation, prayer meeting, worship service is to continue studying, sharing God’s wisdom. Just don’t over react. k!<\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA:<\/strong>  With the way you project, I tend to be impressed that revin, the INC I discussed with in an older thread, had shown more humility in his approach. <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria<\/strong>: <\/strong>Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Back to basics.

Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth…26 Then God said, \u201cLet Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness;

I think you are familiar with John 1:1.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

John 1:1
“In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was god.”

** So where is one entity “God” composed of Father and Christ?  

** In Genesis, it shows the Father was talking with someone and that was Christ as some of us know. (since the others don’t know it )

** So where is that one entity called “God” which composed of the Father and Christ there? 

** In John 1:1, it tells us that Christ is the WORD, and that WORD was already with God since the beginning. And that WORD was god.

(strong proof that he really is not a man, that’s why INC’s doctrine the he never was a god is so UNBIBLICAL and these are the people that you consider more ryt!? )

** So where is that one entity called “God” which composed of the Father and Christ there? 

** You are just assuming and not proving anything with your belief. I will wait anyway if you still got other verse to use that is imperative and if that is the case, I am the man who accepts truth, esp if our soul is what at stake. I can admit anytime that I am wrong with my belief just show us a strong evidence in the bible that what you are telling us is true. This is how are leader had taught us, accept only what is biblically true. If we are doubtful to what our leader has been teaching us, they are open for any questions. That is a showcae of sincerity that they only want the truth. For the member’s soul and for God’s glory not them.  

** How bout in INC? Your church? can you or other people ask questions regarding faith? (pls answer honestly)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

When Christ uttered the words in John 14:28, he, the Word, already became flesh, a mortal being having shed off his God nature of being immortal.
Btw, are the words Jesus spoke in your quoted verse also the Father’s?.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

** even the word BECAME flesh (I will follow you on this word since it was used in other translation), it doesn’t mean Christ really became man.
Becoz that’s your point ryt? Christ became man, so obviously he is inferior if that was the case. But it was only YOU ALONGWITH THE INC’s who considered Christ a man. 

The apostles though Christ manifested in flesh still considered him a god since he was the word in the beginning which is a god, and it will never change. 

2 Peter 1:1
“Simon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ”

** for you and INC’s Jesus is a man, but for the apostles and us, he is still a god.

** how can you even break this phrase from the apostle? and who do you want me to believe, you or the apostles?  

** What is another proof from the bible that Christ only used a human body?

1 John 4:2
“Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God:”

” Dito’y nakikilala ninyo ang Espiritu ng Dios: ang bawa’t espiritung nagpapahayag na si Jesucristo ay naparitong nasa laman ay sa Dios:”

** he has come in flesh, and it didnt tell us that Christ is flesh, he is god. Naparitong nasa laman, meaning there is something within that laman\/flesh, and that is Christ. 

** It is easy to understand if you are willing to understand but if you are persistent with your own belief, then that is the problem there. 

There is no problem in keeping your belief along with the INC’s that Christ is a man and we will stick to that belief along with the apostles that Christ is god.  
————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There is one “God”. And this “God” is composed of two beings referred to as “God” and the Word who is also “God”. 

The description “family” of the unity of the beings composing “God” is used to enable man to grasp it. There is a father and a son. There is a family in heaven.

Ephesians 3:14 For this reason I bow my knees to the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, 15 from whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named…<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

**There is family in heaven ryt, it’s biblical and I think that is where the concept of having a family on earth came from. As you have said, THEY ARE UNITED and amen for that! but being united doesnt mean they are in one entity or being as “God”. They are UNITED ONE AND NOT ABSOLUTE ONE. Christ even said, “My Father and I are one” but it doesnt mean he is the Father and at the same time he is the son Jesus. They are united one just like the WIFE AND HUSBAND WHICH IS ALSO CONSIDERED BY THE BIBLE AS ONE. Us being fiilipinos are one (whenever pac fights ). His Father and Christ are one in what sense? They are one in their goal to make us righteous like them. 

So again, your use of the verse doesn’t prove anything that “God” is composed of the Father and the son. That the word “family” proves that one entity “God” is composed of the Father and the son. It is really inconsiderable honestly. Sorry!  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I’ve pointed out Philippians 2 and Hebrews 2 which I think you have already read. But you can read again and understand in the light of the other passages.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

**Just post the exact verse if you really know what you are saying just like what am doing always, the exact verse! Immortal became mortal? do you really understand the word immortal?

**Immortal means living in an infinite\/endless time. 
And how dare you to put end in Christ’s life, he being the begotten son of god which exists since the beginning of everything. am not angry though. just want the right words for this.  

**so you will gonna ask, didn’t Jesus die? yes, the human body, flesh that he used it was crucified and died. It was the mortal you were referring to, the body, but not the Christ that is within that body. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The word used is “became”. There is a change from spirit to flesh.

John 1:14 And the Word became flesh…

Your group’s belief that “He used a HUMAN BODY WHICH IS MORTAL BUT THE CHRIST THAT IS WITHIN THAT BODY REMAINS AND WILL REMAIN IMMORTAL” will simply mean that Christ did not die. This is what is clearly not biblical.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

** I just answered and explained it. It was the flesh or body (that Christ used) that died. 

** try to look at the pigs that were possessed by the bad spirits, the pigs drowned themselves but it didnt kill the bad spirits but they just went out. Becoz they are immortal and that is the reason why God prepares eternal damnation or everlasting punishment for this everlasting spirits. He could make them mortal and just kill them right away so that the evil would end already ayt!? But God is a God of His word, justice, fairness and integrity. Spirit meant to be a spirit that’s why to end all these evil soon, eternal punishment is what God prepares. 

** honestly ask yourself being a mortal man, how can you kill an immortal spirit? and how can a mortal man kill the begotten son of God which exists before everything. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Not to me in this case. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

** becoz you have your own belief and mine is based in what Ive learned which is biblical.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What is ridiculous is your proposition that, in reality, Christ did not really die.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

** It was the body that he used that died (again). 
The REAL AND DREADFUL DEATH (2nd death as the bible termed it in Revelation) that a man could ever experience is the everlasting death in the lake of fire. The punishment that God prepares. 

** when a man died? do you think he really died as in, he vanished forever? I think you know the answer coz how God will be able to punish them (the judged wicked ones) forver if they would just vanish away. 

** so if you know also that biblically these men really didn’t die or tasted the real death, even they experienced the first death, they really didnt die cioz the real death(forever punishment) is yet to come.

How can you tell us that Christ within that body\/flesh had died? Your problem is, you cant accept the fact that he just used a human body. You and the INC’s have the same FALSE BELIEFA COZ THE APOSTLE IS TEACHING US THAT HE IS STILL A GOD THATS WITH THE FATHER IN THE BEGINNING. 

That’s your problem and not us, and we have proved that by showing a lot of verses. I was actually still limited using verses coz I already forgot the other verses since I am not doing this (forum post) for several years.  

To be continued…. as I promised, I will answer all your queries. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA:<\/strong>  howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

John 1:1
“In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was god.”

** So where is one entity “God” composed of Father and Christ?  

** In Genesis, it shows the Father was talking with someone and that was Christ as some of us know. (since the others don’t know it )

** So where is that one entity called “God” which composed of the Father and Christ there?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I thought you said you already know all there is to know. It appears you still don’t. I’ll show the Hebrew word for “God”.

Genesis 1:1 In the beginning Elohim created the heavens and the earth…26 Then Elohim said, \u201cLet Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness;<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

** In John 1:1, it tells us that Christ is the WORD, and that WORD was already with God since the beginning. And that WORD was god.

(strong proof that he really is not a man, that’s why INC’s doctrine the he never was a god is so UNBIBLICAL and these are the people that you consider more ryt!? )

** So where is that one entity called “God” which composed of the Father and Christ there?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Hint: El is singular. Elohim is plural.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

** You are just assuming and not proving anything with your belief. I will wait anyway if you still got other verse to use that is imperative and if that is the case, I am the man who accepts truth, esp if our soul is what at stake. I can admit anytime that I am wrong with my belief just show us a strong evidence in the bible that what you are telling us is true. This is how are leader had taught us, accept only what is biblically true. If we are doubtful to what our leader has been teaching us, they are open for any questions. That is a showcae of sincerity that they only want the truth. For the member’s soul and for God’s glory not them. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

It’s not a problem to me if you failed to understand Elohim.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

** How bout in INC? Your church? can you or other people ask questions regarding faith? (pls answer honestly)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

There are threads about faith in this forum. If you care to read, you might learn something.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

becoz the bible tells us, even Christ tells us that they are different or separate being.
Jesus even regards his Father as a SUPERIOR being than him.
proof?

John 14:28 
“….. I go unto the Father: for my Father is GREATER THAN I.”

You just need to accept that they are two different being and the Father is greater than Christ. It is not being disrespectful with Christ becoz he himself said it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I’ll elaborate on the unity in “God” which still escapes you. There are two beings, individual Gods, but these two form a class or family called “God”. 

The comparison in man is husband and wife. There are two beings but after marriage, they are ONE flesh.

Ephesians 5:31 \u201cFor this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.\u201d

The Father and Jesus are ONE God.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

** even the word BECAME flesh (I will follow you on this word since it was used in other translation), it doesn’t mean Christ really became man.
Becoz that’s your point ryt? Christ became man, so obviously he is inferior if that was the case. But it was only YOU ALONGWITH THE INC’s who considered Christ a man. 

The apostles though Christ manifested in flesh still considered him a god since he was the word in the beginning which is a god, and it will never change. 

2 Peter 1:1
“Simon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ”

** for you and INC’s Jesus is a man, but for the apostles and us, he is still a god.

** how can you even break this phrase from the apostle? and who do you want me to believe, you or the apostles? <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Can’t you avoid dragging INC into our discussion? This is one on one. Besides, I also don’t agree with the INC stand on the nature of Jesus Christ.

Prior to and after his resurrection, the being named I AM, Word, YHWH, Jesus Christ, was and is God. In between, he was lower than angels and subject to the power of death. And he died.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

** What is another proof from the bible that Christ only used a human body?

1 John 4:2
“Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God:”
” Dito’y nakikilala ninyo ang Espiritu ng Dios: ang bawa’t espiritung nagpapahayag na si Jesucristo ay naparitong nasa laman ay sa Dios:”

** he has come in flesh, and it didnt tell us that Christ is flesh, he is god. Naparitong nasa laman, meaning there is something within that laman\/flesh, and that is Christ. 

** It is easy to understand if you are willing to understand but if you are persistent with your own belief, then that is the problem there. 

There is no problem in keeping your belief along with the INC’s that Christ is a man and we will stick to that belief along with the apostles that Christ is god. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

You are misusing the verse to support your understanding which is that Christ did not die.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

**There is family in heaven ryt, it’s biblical and I think that is where the concept of having a family on earth came from. As you have said, THEY ARE UNITED and amen for that! but being united doesnt mean they are in one entity or being as “God”. They are UNITED ONE AND NOT ABSOLUTE ONE. Christ even said, “My Father and I are one” but it doesnt mean he is the Father and at the same time he is the son Jesus. They are united one just like the WIFE AND HUSBAND WHICH IS ALSO CONSIDERED BY THE BIBLE AS ONE. Us being fiilipinos are one (whenever pac fights ). His Father and Christ are one in what sense? They are one in their goal to make us righteous like them. 

So again, your use of the verse doesn’t prove anything that “God” is composed of the Father and the son. That the word “family” proves that one entity “God” is composed of the Father and the son. It is really inconsiderable honestly. Sorry! <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

If you still don’t get it, your “sorry” is understandable. But you can understand it later.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

**Just post the exact verse if you really know what you are saying just like what am doing always, the exact verse! Immortal became mortal? do you really understand the word immortal?

**Immortal means living in an infinite\/endless time. 
And how dare you to put end in Christ’s life, he being the begotten son of god which exists since the beginning of everything. am not angry though. just want the right words for this.  

**so you will gonna ask, didn’t Jesus die? yes, the human body, flesh that he used it was crucified and died. It was the mortal you were referring to, the body, but not the Christ that is within that body.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Nothing is impossible for God. God made the Word mortal for the purpose of death. And Jesus died. 

Your belief that Christ did not die is directly the opposite to what Paul emphasizes. Christ died. Christ’s death is of first importance. 

1 Corinthians 15:3 For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died…

To say that Christ did not die is a lie. If he did not die, then the resurrection was a hoax. Why did Christ have to be raised from the dead? Obviously because he was lifeless!

1 Corinthians 15:4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures,

To preach that Christ did not die is to say that the Father was just fooling around when he raised Christ from the dead.

Acts 13:30 But God raised Him from the dead.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Christ is an immortal being yes! but to say that he became mortal, AGAIN IT SHOWS INNOCENCE OF THE BIBLE. It is true that Christ manifested in flesh. It is written. He used a HUMAN BODY WHICH IS MORTAL BUT THE CHRIST THAT IS WITHIN THAT BODY REMAINS AND WILL REMAIN IMMORTAL.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Using all caps in the forum is equivalent to shouting. You should not be shouting a false belief.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

** I just answered and explained it. It was the flesh or body (that Christ used) that died. 

** try to look at the pigs that were possessed by the bad spirits, the pigs drowned themselves but it didnt kill the bad spirits but they just went out. Becoz they are immortal and that is the reason why God prepares eternal damnation or everlasting punishment for this everlasting spirits. He could make them mortal and just kill them right away so that the evil would end already ayt!? But God is a God of His word, justice, fairness and integrity. Spirit meant to be a spirit that’s why to end all these evil soon, eternal punishment is what God prepares.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Your analogy of spirit getting inside humans or pigs is not applicable. It’s clear the spirits entered into these beings.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In Christ’s case, the spirit became flesh.

I have a hunch the evil spirits will someday be likewise killed by God after he is finished in creating man in his image according to his likeness.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

** honestly ask yourself being a mortal man, how can you kill an immortal spirit? and how can a mortal man kill the begotten son of God which exists before everything.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I am not asking that question anymore. The bible shows that an immortal can become mortal. The immortal being laid down his life. 

1 John 3:16 By this we know love, because He laid down His life for us.

Notice that what Christ laid down is his life. It is not that he just discarded his lifeless body.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

** becoz you have your own belief and mine is based in what Ive learned which is biblical. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

It would help you if you take another look at your belief. But it’s your choice.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

** It was the body that he used that died (again).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Simply, to you Christ did not really die.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

http:\/\/forum.philboxing.com\/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=185726&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=315<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The REAL AND DREADFUL DEATH (2nd death as the bible termed it in Revelation) that a man could ever experience is the everlasting death in the lake of fire. The punishment that God prepares.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Your statement is not biblical. Not even logical.

When a man dies, he doesn’t experience anything. His consciousness ceases at the point of death. What is harrowing is before death and it is so because the man is still alive and can still feel and think. At death, the man knows nothing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

** when a man died? do you think he really died as in, he vanished forever? I think you know the answer coz how God will be able to punish them (the judged wicked ones) forver if they would just vanish away.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Death is what awaits the man who chooses not to make God to reign over him. The choice is made after the man has been imbued or gifted with the Holy Spirit to capacitate him to really exercise knowingly his freedom to choose.

The men who have since died without receiving the Holy Spirit are now unconscious. They have the hope of being resurrected again because Christ himself was resurrected from the dead. Had Christ not been raised from the dead, then those men who have since died have perished and those who will still die will perish. Thankfully Christ was raised from the dead.

1 Corinthians 15:14 And if Christ is not risen, then our preaching is empty and your faith is also empty. 15 Yes, and we are found false witnesses of God, because we have testified of God that He raised up Christ, whom He did not raise up\u2014if in fact the dead do not rise. 16 For if the dead do not rise, then Christ is not risen. 17 And if Christ is not risen, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins! 18 Then also those who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

** so if you know also that biblically these men really didn’t die or tasted the real death, even they experienced the first death, they really didnt die cioz the real death(forever punishment) is yet to come.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The really died. They have decomposed. They’re unconscious now. The difference between the first death and the second is that, because of Christ’s resurrection, those who died the first death will be resurrected. Those who will be meted the second death will no longer be revived. They will perish.

The oft quoted and most popular bible verse is clear on the opposite of everlasting life. Perish.

John 3:16 For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

How can you tell us that Christ within that body\/flesh had died? Your problem is, you cant accept the fact that he just used a human body. You and the INC’s have the same FALSE BELIEFA COZ THE APOSTLE IS TEACHING US THAT HE IS STILL A GOD THATS WITH THE FATHER IN THE BEGINNING.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I’ll point to you what spirit was in Christ when he became flesh. God filled the flesh turned spirit Word with the Holy Spirit.

Luke 4:1 Then Jesus, being filled with the Holy Spirit…<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

That’s your problem and not us, and we have proved that by showing a lot of verses. I was actually still limited using verses coz I already forgot the other verses since I am not doing this (forum post) for several years. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

To make a person understand is not my function or any man’s. I only explain. The granting of understanding is God’s job.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

To be continued…. as I promised, I will answer all your queries. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

It appears you have not responded to all my posts. No problem, take your time. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Mang Heruino: <\/strong>I am learning a lot with the above exchanges, Ka Epi. You have clear responses and your Biblical quotes are exactly explained. I only have a question about that “perish” thing. I though when the word, perish, in the Bible is used, it pertains to the eternal damnation or punishment in the lake of fire. Now it seems that it is not or there is another (or correct?) meaning of it. Thank you.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA:<\/strong>  There is another, and it is the correct, meaning of eternal damnation or punishment. As in John 3:16, the word “but” in Matthew 25:46 shows that “everlasting punishment” is the opposite of “eternal life”. 

Matthew 25:46 And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.\u201d

“Everlasting punishment” does not mean everlasting punishing. It means that the effect of the punishment, which is death, is irreversible. Eternal death is the opposite of eternal life. 

The misunderstanding of “eternal damnation or punishment” stems from Satan’s lie believed by many that the soul will not die contrary to God’s declaration.

Genesis 3:1 Now the serpent was more cunning than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said to the woman, \u201cHas God indeed said, \u2018You shall not eat of every tree of the garden\u2019?\u201d
2 And the woman said to the serpent, \u201cWe may eat the fruit of the trees of the garden; 3 but of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God has said, \u2018You shall not eat it, nor shall you touch it, lest you die.\u2019\u201d 
4 Then the serpent said to the woman, \u201cYou will not surely die. 

If the “eternal damnation or punishment” means that the person punished will not die but suffer without ceasing forever, then God being merciful is belied.

To perish is to be gone forever. The existence of a person will vanish. Forgotten. He will be as if he had never been.

Obadiah 1:16…And they shall be as though they had never been.

The “older” PRMOers discussed “perish” in the thread “What do you understand by “perish” in John 3:16?” http:\/\/forum.philboxing.com\/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=82548<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria<\/strong>:<\/strong> Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Hint: El is singular. Elohim is plural.?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

word Elohim is still questionable as when to use it as plural or singular AND YOU ARE NOT THE OFFICIAL PERSON TO GIVE “ELOHIM” THE MEANING BEING PLURAL JUST TO JUSTIFY YOUR BELIEF OF THE WORD “GOD” which for you composed of the Father and the son. 

(WIKIPEDIA) 
Elohim occurs frequently throughout the received text of the Torah. In some cases (e.g. Exodus 3:4, “… Elohim called unto him out of the midst of the bush …”), it acts as asingular noun in Hebrew grammar, and is then generally understood to denote the single God of Israel. In other cases, Elohim acts as an ordinary plural of the word Eloah, and refers to the polytheistic notion of multiple gods (for example, Exodus 20:3, “Thou shalt have no other gods before me.”).

In the Hebrew Bible Elohim, when meaning the God of Israel, is mostly grammatically singular. Even in Genesis 1:26 “Then God said (singular verb), ‘Let us make (plural verb) man in our image, after our likeness’.” Elohim is singular.
 <\/p>\n\n\n\n

**based on the above statement, Elohim ACTS AND GENERALLY UNDERSTOOD TO DENOTE THE SINGLE GOD OF ISRAEL (which is the Father). This proves really that your belief of the word “God” composed of the Father and son is FALSE. MOst esp your given ex in Genesis. 

** sometimes Elohim used to refer to multiple gods (the deities) like that in Exodus 20:3 (and not pertaining to the God the Father but to the deities)  

** So where is your proof AGAIN, that the word “God” is one entity composed of the Father and the son?  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It’s not a problem to me if you failed to understand Elohim.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I think it is not hard to understand the word ELOHIM.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There are threads about faith in this forum. If you care to read, you might learn something. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Why can’t you answer directly? Us, we are noted for having an open forum on TV, or question and answer portion where diff people of diff religion can ask any questions. Regardless if you believe what our leader’s answers are since not all could really accept the truth. Atleast, there is that sincerity to help people to help them solve their doubts, questions in mind using verses of the bible. 

Question again, does your religion also entertain questions regarding faith from diff people? If your answer AGAIN is, “here! just read threads and you might learn something” Think again!  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I’ll elaborate on the unity in “God” which still escapes you. There are two beings, individual Gods, but these two form a class or family called “God”. 

The comparison in man is husband and wife. There are two beings but after marriage, they are ONE flesh.

Ephesians 5:31 \u201cFor this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.\u201d

The Father and Jesus are ONE God.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

** And this doesn’t mean that the wife is the husband and the husband is the wife and still, they are two different beings. Two different beings that will be judged.  

John 10:30 
“I and my Father are one.”

This is what the bible says, and not what you were saying “Father and Jesus are ONE GOD. This is something you CAN’T PROVE BIBLICALLY.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Can’t you avoid dragging INC into our discussion? This is one on one. Besides, I also don’t agree with the INC stand on the nature of Jesus Christ.

Prior to and after his resurrection, the being named I AM, Word, YHWH, Jesus Christ, was and is God. In between, he was lower than angels and subject to the power of death. And he died.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

** why are you hurt whenever I mention INC? Just asking.  
** It was like a President for ex who made himself lower by taking the place of a beggar for example or typical person just to know how does it feel like. He lowers himself but still, we know he is still the president. For a while, he took off his title being the president by doing what a typical person does but still, it doesn’t change him for good, he is still the president. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

You are misusing the verse to support your understanding which is that Christ did not die.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

See. You can’t dispute the verse! it is easy to say i misused it but you can’t dispute actually coz the verse tells us the HE ONLY USED A HUMAN BODY. It is the bible and not me who is telling that.

1 John 4:2
“Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God:”

” Dito’y nakikilala ninyo ang Espiritu ng Dios: ang bawa’t espiritung nagpapahayag na si Jesucristo ay naparitong nasa laman ay sa Dios:”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

If you still don’t get it, your “sorry” is understandable. But you can understand it later.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Iam really sorry coz you can’t prove your stand. You have used the word “ELOHIM”, but it just proved you wrong. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA:<\/strong>  howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

word Elohim is still questionable as when to use it as plural or singular AND YOU ARE NOT THE OFFICIAL PERSON TO GIVE “ELOHIM” THE MEANING BEING PLURAL JUST TO JUSTIFY YOUR BELIEF OF THE WORD “GOD” which for you composed of the Father and the son.\u00a0

(WIKIPEDIA)\u00a0
Elohim occurs frequently throughout the received text of the Torah. In some cases (e.g. Exodus 3:4, “… Elohim called unto him out of the midst of the bush …”), it acts as a\u00a0singular noun\u00a0in Hebrew grammar, and is then generally\u00a0understood to denote the single God of Israel. In other cases, Elohim acts as an ordinary\u00a0plural of the word Eloah, and refers to the polytheistic notion of multiple\u00a0gods\u00a0(for example, Exodus 20:3, “Thou shalt have no other\u00a0gods\u00a0before me.”).

In the Hebrew Bible Elohim, when meaning the God of Israel, is mostly grammatically singular. Even in Genesis 1:26 “Then God said (singular verb), ‘Let us make (plural verb) man in our image, after our likeness’.” Elohim is singular.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

**based on the above statement, Elohim ACTS AND GENERALLY UNDERSTOOD TO DENOTE THE SINGLE GOD OF ISRAEL (which is the Father).\u00a0This proves really that your belief of the word “God” composed of the Father and son is FALSE.\u00a0MOst esp your given ex in Genesis.\u00a0

** sometimes Elohim used to refer to multiple gods (the deities) like that in Exodus 20:3 (and not pertaining to the God the Father but to the deities)\u00a0\u00a0

** So where is your proof AGAIN, that the word “God” is one entity composed of the Father and the son?\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Your authority is Wikipedia!?!

One of my authorities is the Online Bible Companion. See: http:\/\/www.companionbiblecondensed.com\/OT\/Genesis…pdf<\/a>

Let’s focus on “God” in Genesis 1:1. The Online Bible Companion: “Go<\/strong>d<\/strong>. Heb. Elohim<\/em>, pl.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I think it is not hard to understand the word ELOHIM. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

But you’re not showing it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Why can’t you answer directly? Us, we are noted for having an open forum on TV, or question and answer portion where diff people of diff religion can ask any questions. Regardless if you believe what our leader’s answers are since not all could really accept the truth. Atleast, there is that sincerity to help people to help them solve their doubts, questions in mind using verses of the bible.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Your question “can you or other people ask questions regarding faith? (pls answer honestly)” was presumptive that you know more than any of the PRMOers. I was just giving you a hint that Christians are humble people since Christ is teaching humility. 

If you want, you can open a thread on your belief on faith and let it be subjected to scrutiny by the other posters.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Question again, does your religion also entertain questions regarding faith from diff people? If your answer AGAIN is, “here! just read threads and you might learn something” Think again! <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

First let us be clarified about your stand on what is religion and what is Church. Whether or not these are the same.

PRMOers are open to ask anybody about their beliefs or non belief by just creating a thread.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

** And this doesn’t mean that the wife is the husband and the husband is the wife and still, they are two different beings. Two different beings that will be judged.  

John 10:30 
“I and my Father are one.”

This is what the bible says, and not what you were saying “Father and Jesus are ONE GOD. This is something you CAN’T PROVE BIBLICALLY. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

You missed my explanation.\u00a0I’ll try again.

A & B formed a partnership called A & B partnership. A & B are the two partners in the A & B partnership. A is a separate person from B and vice versa. A & B partnership is an entity separate and distinct from each of A & B.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

God (A) and the Word (B) compose the partnership called “God”.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

** why are you hurt whenever I mention INC? Just asking. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

If I “hurt”, I “hurt” for you because you profess to be a bible believer. We are talking with each other one on one. When you inject a debasing comment on another before me who is not a party in our discussion, you are actually gossiping. And Paul discourages gossips! (1 Timothy 5:11-14)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

** It was like a President for ex who made himself lower by taking the place of a beggar for example or typical person just to know how does it feel like. He lowers himself but still, we know he is still the president. For a while, he took off his title being the president by doing what a typical person does but still, it doesn’t change him for good, he is still the president.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Word did not just take off his title but his Godly nature of being not subject to death. The purpose was to die and he died. 

Your position is that Christ allowed himself to be demoted to perform a make believe death. And that he did not really die. Nothing could be farther from the truth! <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

See. You can’t dispute the verse! it is easy to say i misused it but you can’t dispute actually coz the verse tells us the HE ONLY USED A HUMAN BODY. It is the bible and not me who is telling that.

1 John 4:2
“Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God:”

” Dito’y nakikilala ninyo ang Espiritu ng Dios: ang bawa’t espiritung nagpapahayag na si Jesucristo ay naparitong nasa laman ay sa Dios:”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Take another look at the verse. “Jesus Christ has come in the flesh” because he became flesh. There was a change in Christ’s nature of being spirit to flesh.

If your belief be sustained, the verse might state, “Jesus Christ has come as spirit inside the flesh”. Which is not the case.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Iam really sorry coz you can’t prove your stand. You have used the word “ELOHIM”, but it just proved you wrong. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

No, you didn’t. You just showed what reference you prefer between Wikepedia and the Bible Companion. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria<\/strong>:<\/strong> I already told you that we are different. If you have lots of time for this forum post, then it is good for you. But I am just telling you to respect when I am free or available responding to your queries. I am a busy man that got work throughout the day and then, practice and games for volleyball and basketball afterwork. I am actually trying hard to spare time during my work just to answer your questions. Honestly.

So if I can’t answer you that quickly as you would like me to, if that is an issue for you, then it’s ok.  

Just want to make this clear first and foremost. Since I have joined this topic and dispute that Christ built the church by giving the irrefutable verse

Hebrew 3:4
“For every house is builded by some man; but he that built all things is God.”

This proves that it was God the Father who built everything which includes the church obviously. You tried to dispute this by giving the verse Hebrew 3:6 by saying that the verse is telling us that it was Christ who actually owns it.

Hebrew 3:6
“But Christ as a son over his own house; whose house are we, if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm unto the end.” 

The I answered back that “HIS own house”\/ HIS there referred to the God the Father and not the son, and I gave you the other translations that prove that IT WAS YOUR UNDERSTANDING THAT IS WRONG AND NOT THE BIBLE.

Hebrew 3:6 (good news)
“But Christ is faithful as the Son in charge of God’s house. We are his house if we keep up our courage and our confidence in what we hope for.”

(New international version)
“But Christ is faithful as a son over God\u2019s house. And we are his house, if we hold on to our courage and the hope of which we boast.”

From this, it is clear that YOU ARE WRONG, YOUR UNDERSTANDING AND NOT THE VERSE ITSELF (but you just can’t admit to yourself). Since you can’t refute or dispute it, you just tried to elude and started to say that there is no issue on who owns and built the church. But ironically, your thread’s title is emphasizing that it was Christ who built the church and even tried to use a couple of verses to prove it , but you just misunderstood it. 

So that’s one there. And that could have closed my dispute with this topic.  

But don’t worry, am so interested to answer your other questions and just make sure you also answer mine. Just remind me if I forgot something coz it is pretty obvious that there are already lots of posts here and by reading it, it takes us a lot of time ayt!?  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This belief is clearly erroneous. God would not be God if he “is not in control for now”. While he 
is allowing Satan to be god in this age, God is in control precisely by allowing Satan to finish his 
administrative duties on earth. God can limit how far Satan could go as in the case of Job and he can 
intervene anytime in man’s affairs as he sees fit. 

Satan is having a field day only because God is allowing man to be independent of God. Through 
Adam and Eve, man chose to be free from God’s control and protection.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

** God can control us yes. He is so powerful for me not to say He can’t. But the fact the He gave us this “freewill” He is not controlling it, He won’t intervene on it. Becoz if He does control our freewill, it’s absurd to call it freewill anymore, and if that is the case, He should have done controlling us for us all to get saved which what He actually wanted.

** But that’s not the essence of freewill. For us that had the chance to listen to His words, it is our own choice , decision on which way are we gonna go. Is it God’s or satan’s way. He won’t control us on this one, he allows us to choose. Once a person had that decision in his heart (for ex. he chose to submit himself and follow what is righteous) then God would intervene and help that man to attain that perfection with the help of the holy spirit coz if it is just us, we can’t becoz flesh is weak. 

** Paul is a good ex right, from being a christian persecutor, to being an apostle. Not becoz He controlled Paul to join Jesus’ team that instantly coz He should\/could have done that to all of us. But for sure, He saw Paul’s heart that this man is ready to serve and follow righteousness (if only this man could hear His words which is the truth.) So that was the time He intervene and made him one of Christ’s disciple. 

** I just cant remember the exact verse that tells us that God and Jesus could read man’s heart which Satan can’t. (I would look for it anyway)

** Allowing satan to finish his administrative duties is like allowing him to deceive men which God does not want to happen. What is the duty and goal of satan? to pervert the truth, to divert men from the truth, to deceive in short and be his follower against God. Would God allow this? Think again!  

** The reason why God still doesnt end the human race is NOT BECOZ HE IS ALLOWING SATAN TO FINISH HIS ADMINISTRATIVE DUTIES. (They are enemies and for sure He won’t allow that.) It is becoz of God’s compassion to men. He would like to give men a chance for everday He is giving us to repent, to understand HIs words, and be in His righteousness for them to get saved. It’s like in the times of Noah. God waits for the others to repent while Noah is still building the ark before He submerged the earth.

1 Peter 3:20
“Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.”

2 Peter 3:15
“And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you.”

(tagalog)
“At inyong ariin na ang pagpapahinuhod ng ating Panginoon ay pagliligtas…….”

* Again, it is not allowing Satan to do his administrative duties. But God still doesn’t end the world coz of His “pagpapahinuhod” becoz of His aspiration to save us all.  

** That’s why He wants His words to be preached in the whole world so that there is fairness and justice that no man could reason out or question God if for ex a man had been sentenced for the eternal punishment. 

** And this is what our group’s doing. The effort of preaching the word of God to the whole wide world by all means that we could ever do. Primarily thru television, then radio and internet. 

** Does your church do this anyway?  

** questions are being entertained live and on the spot.
** bible exposition all over the countries
** the result, awards and appreciation of what they have been hearing. Ofcorz the glory is to God. To His truth. 
** expectedly, not all could appreciate but the appreaciation and awards we have been getting means, what our leaders are preaching is something.

** How bout your church? musta?  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There is no impossible for God.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

YOU ARE WRONG AGAIN biblically speaking! Don’t worry, am not mocking! I am just telling you the truth. For you there is no impossible for God. But for the bible there is something impossible for God. 
Hebrews 6:18
“That by two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us”

** It is not me who said YOU ARE WRONG, it was the bible.  

** Our church name is….

Members of the Church of God in Christ Jesus the pillar and ground of truth. 1 Timothy 3:15 

** Am so proud of it.  
** aren’t you proud of your church? <\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA:<\/strong>  howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I already told you that we are different. If you have lots of time for this forum post, then it is good for you. But I am just telling you to respect when I am free or available responding to your queries. I am a busy man that got work throughout the day and then, practice and games for volleyball and basketball afterwork. I am actually trying hard to spare time during my work just to answer your questions. Honestly.

So if I can’t answer you that quickly as you would like me to, if that is an issue for you, then it’s ok. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

If you read again my posts, I was assuring you to take your time. But you are perceiving the opposite.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Just want to make this clear first and foremost. Since I have joined this topic and dispute that Christ built the church by giving the irrefutable verse

Hebrew 3:4
“For every house is builded by some man; but he that built all things is God.”

This proves that it was God the Father who built everything which includes the church obviously. You tried to dispute this by giving the verse Hebrew 3:6 by saying that the verse is telling us that it was Christ who actually owns it.

Hebrew 3:6
“But Christ as a son over his own house; whose house are we, if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm unto the end.” 

The I answered back that “HIS own house”\/ HIS there referred to the God the Father and not the son, and I gave you the other translations that prove that IT WAS YOUR UNDERSTANDING THAT IS WRONG AND NOT THE BIBLE.

Hebrew 3:6 (good news)
“But Christ is faithful as the Son in charge of God’s house. We are his house if we keep up our courage and our confidence in what we hope for.”

(New international version)
“But Christ is faithful as a son over God\u2019s house. And we are his house, if we hold on to our courage and the hope of which we boast.”

From this, it is clear that YOU ARE WRONG, YOUR UNDERSTANDING AND NOT THE VERSE ITSELF (but you just can’t admit to yourself). Since you can’t refute or dispute it, you just tried to elude and started to say that there is no issue on who owns and built the church. But ironically, your thread’s title is emphasizing that it was Christ who built the church and even tried to use a couple of verses to prove it , but you just misunderstood it. 

So that’s one there. And that could have closed my dispute with this topic. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

You did not post the versions which render “His” and “God” as “his” and there are many. My stand is between the two beings who co-own and co-built the Church, It is Christ who actually built it. The phrase “built all things” is general. The specific is Christ’s statement, “I will build my Church”. 

This is a non-issue you attempted to be one. Now I’ll wait for my other unresponded comments on your stand like the Father giving the commandments to Moses instead of Jesus Christ, that the Church has been formed even in the OT times, your stand on the great white throne judgment, your reaction to my stand that salvation is not the primary purpose of Christ’s death and resurrection, etc. These are more important and interesting issues. 

But there’s no pressure at all because you’re busy. And who is not between the two of us?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But don’t worry, am so interested to answer your other questions and just make sure you also answer mine. Just remind me if I forgot something coz it is pretty obvious that there are already lots of posts here and by reading it, it takes us a lot of time ayt!? <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

No, it won’t worry me a bit even if you don’t respond. You bragged that you could enlighten me but so far I haven’t been yet. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

** God can control us yes. He is so powerful for me not to say He can’t. But the fact the He gave us this “freewill” He is not controlling it, He won’t intervene on it. Becoz if He does control our freewill, it’s absurd to call it freewill anymore, and if that is the case, He should have done controlling us for us all to get saved which what He actually wanted.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

You were talking about God’s not being in control of the calamities like typhoons, earthquakes, and the like.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

** But that’s not the essence of freewill. For us that had the chance to listen to His words, it is our own choice , decision on which way are we gonna go. Is it God’s or satan’s way. He won’t control us on this one, he allows us to choose. Once a person had that decision in his heart (for ex. he chose to submit himself and follow what is righteous) then God would intervene and help that man to attain that perfection with the help of the holy spirit coz if it is just us, we can’t becoz flesh is weak. 

** Paul is a good ex right, from being a christian persecutor, to being an apostle. Not becoz He controlled Paul to join Jesus’ team that instantly coz He should\/could have done that to all of us. But for sure, He saw Paul’s heart that this man is ready to serve and follow righteousness (if only this man could hear His words which is the truth.) So that was the time He intervene and made him one of Christ’s disciple. 

** I just cant remember the exact verse that tells us that God and Jesus could read man’s heart which Satan can’t. (I would look for it anyway)

** Allowing satan to finish his administrative duties is like allowing him to deceive men which God does not want to happen. What is the duty and goal of satan? to pervert the truth, to divert men from the truth, to deceive in short and be his follower against God. Would God allow this? Think again! <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is for you to think. God is not saving everyone in this age. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

** The reason why God still doesnt end the human race is NOT BECOZ HE IS ALLOWING SATAN TO FINISH HIS ADMINISTRATIVE DUTIES. (They are enemies and for sure He won’t allow that.) It is becoz of God’s compassion to men. He would like to give men a chance for everday He is giving us to repent, to understand HIs words, and be in His righteousness for them to get saved. It’s like in the times of Noah. God waits for the others to repent while Noah is still building the ark before He submerged the earth.

1 Peter 3:20
“Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.”

2 Peter 3:15
“And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you.”

(tagalog)
“At inyong ariin na ang pagpapahinuhod ng ating Panginoon ay pagliligtas…….”

* Again, it is not allowing Satan to do his administrative duties. But God still doesn’t end the world coz of His “pagpapahinuhod” becoz of His aspiration to save us all.  

** That’s why He wants His words to be preached in the whole world so that there is fairness and justice that no man could reason out or question God if for ex a man had been sentenced for the eternal punishment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

So your stand is that God and Satan are in a contest of winning souls. Poor God. Satan is winning!!! Don’t you think?

My stand is that there is no contest between God and Satan. Satan reports to God when God summons him. God is just allowing man to experience to the fullest how it is to be without God on his side for a season.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

** And this is what our group’s doing. The effort of preaching the word of God to the whole wide world by all means that we could ever do. Primarily thru television, then radio and internet. 

** Does your church do this anyway?  
** questions are being entertained live and on the spot.
** bible exposition all over the countries
** the result, awards and appreciation of what they have been hearing. Ofcorz the glory is to God. To His truth. 
** expectedly, not all could appreciate but the appreaciation and awards we have been getting means, what our leaders are preaching is something.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

So your purpose is to convict and convince people to become like you. That people who hear should be convinced.

My stand is different as regards “preaching”. I share what I understand. I answer when asked. I act respectfully and esteem others better than myself because actions speak louder than words. 

When a person’s actions do not conform to what he is teaching by offending people, they will just say, “I can’t hear what you are shouting because your actions speak louder!”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

** How bout your church? musta? <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I’ve shown you the thread “Where is the Church Jesus built”. That’s how you will know about the group in which I’m a part.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

YOU ARE WRONG AGAIN biblically speaking! Don’t worry, am not mocking! I am just telling you the truth. For you there is no impossible for God. But for the bible there is something impossible for God. 

Hebrews 6:18
“That by two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us”

** It is not me who said YOU ARE WRONG, it was the bible. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

You are being picky and assume I don’t know the verse. The statement is general and is based on Christ’s statement.

Matthew 19:26 But Jesus looked at them and said to them, \u201cWith men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.\u201d

We were talking about an immortal which God could turn into mortal as what happened to the Word.

Accentuate the positive.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

** Our church name is….

Members of the Church of God in Christ Jesus the pillar and ground of truth. 1 Timothy 3:15 

** Am so proud of it.  

** aren’t you proud of your church? <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Do you really understand what the “Church of God” is? In the thread “Where is the Church Jesus built” you might pick up some insights. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria<\/strong>:<\/strong> Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A Christian is not provocative and answers only when asked in humility the bible describes as 
“with meekness and fear”.

Preaching what you believe and answering questions are not fighting. Correcting publicly others who are
preaching their beliefs is provocative and will lead to conflict. And this is minding another’s 
business. Correcting a person’s belief is only proper when one asks for it or he is one of your group.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

** Ye right. With meekness and fear. It is biblical and amen to that. Sometimes, by telling the truth, it could really hurt someone esp those people that dont want to be taught, be coz they have their own rule and belief. BUt not all people though are like that. There are peple which are willing to learn and accept if they are wrong and openly willing to be corrected. 

Telling your friend nicely and remind him that cheating is not good is not provocative though. Telling your loved ones about what is good and bad is no wrong. 

We had been taught to become meek. yes! and not been taugh on how to become FIERCE, CRUEL OR SAVAGE. Just like the other religious group.

Have you heard, seen anyway that members from our group killed someone? I dont think so that there was. BUt try to look at the works of the members from the other group. It shows who has really been taught well of the words of God. not being pompous but it really shows. 

The inquisition of the catholic church.
http:\/\/www.exposingchristianity.com\/Inquisition.html<\/a>

INC murder
https:\/\/remote.halifax.org\/,DanaInfo=ww … NQJaf7uLJM<\/a>

** Preaching the true words of God even publicly is figting against all the forces of evil. This is what the apostles and Jesus himself did actually. That’s why some of them were persecuted and killed.

Matthew 23:13-14
“13 Datapuwa’t sa aba ninyo, mga eskriba at mga Fariseo, mga mapagpaimbabaw! sapagka’t sinasarhan ninyo ang kaharian ng langit laban sa mga tao: sapagka’t kayo’y hindi na nagsisipasok, at ang nagsisipasok man ay ayaw ninyong bayaang mangakapasok. 14 Sa aba ninyo, mga eskriba’t mga Fariseo, mga mapagpaimbabaw! Sapagka’t sinasakmal ninyo ang mga bahay ng mga babaing bao, at inyong dinadahilan ang mahahabang panalangin: kaya’t magsisitanggap kayo ng lalong mabigat na parusa. “

Lucas 3:7
“Sinasabi nga niya sa mga karamihang nagsisilabas upang mangagpabautismo sa kaniya, Kayong lahi ng mga ulupong, sino ang sa inyo’y nagudyok upang tumakas sa galit na darating?”

This is Jesus and apostle.  

Correcting others belief even if he is not asking is what the apostle and Christ did. The chosen one, leader of God preaches even no one asks. His purpose is to disseminate the truth even he was not asked. 

He said to the apostles, spread the word of God upto the ends of the world and not “preach them whenever they ask only.  

Marcos 16:15
“And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA:<\/strong>  howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

** Ye right. With meekness and fear. It is biblical and amen to that. Sometimes, by telling the truth, it could really hurt someone esp those people that dont want to be taught, be coz they have their own rule and belief. BUt not all people though are like that. There are peple which are willing to learn and accept if they are wrong and openly willing to be corrected. 

Telling your friend nicely and remind him that cheating is not good is not provocative though. Telling your loved ones about what is good and bad is no wrong. 

We had been taught to become meek. yes! and not been taugh on how to become FIERCE, CRUEL OR SAVAGE. Just like the other religious group.

Have you heard, seen anyway that members from our group killed someone? I dont think so that there was. BUt try to look at the works of the members from the other group. It shows who has really been taught well of the words of God. not being pompous but it really shows.  

The inquisition of the catholic church.
http:\/\/www.exposingchristianity.com\/Inquisition.html<\/a>

INC murder
https:\/\/remote.halifax.org\/,DanaInfo=ww … NQJaf7uLJM<\/a>

** Preaching the true words of God even publicly is figting against all the forces of evil. This is what the apostles and Jesus himself did actually. That’s why some of them were persecuted and killed.

Matthew 23:13-14
“13 Datapuwa’t sa aba ninyo, mga eskriba at mga Fariseo, mga mapagpaimbabaw! sapagka’t sinasarhan ninyo ang kaharian ng langit laban sa mga tao: sapagka’t kayo’y hindi na nagsisipasok, at ang nagsisipasok man ay ayaw ninyong bayaang mangakapasok. 14 Sa aba ninyo, mga eskriba’t mga Fariseo, mga mapagpaimbabaw! Sapagka’t sinasakmal ninyo ang mga bahay ng mga babaing bao, at inyong dinadahilan ang mahahabang panalangin: kaya’t magsisitanggap kayo ng lalong mabigat na parusa. “

Lucas 3:7
“Sinasabi nga niya sa mga karamihang nagsisilabas upang mangagpabautismo sa kaniya, Kayong lahi ng mga ulupong, sino ang sa inyo’y nagudyok upang tumakas sa galit na darating?”

This is Jesus and apostle. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The speaker in Luke 3 is John the Baptist, not John the apostle. And John the Baptist is of a different class of a man because even when he was still in his mother’s womb, he was already filled with the Holy Spirit. Unlike the apostles and the other Christians.

Luke 1:15 For he will be great in the sight of the Lord, and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink. He will also be filled with the Holy Spirit, even from his mother\u2019s womb.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Correcting others belief even if he is not asking is what the apostle and Christ did. The chosen one, leader of God preaches even no one asks. His purpose is to disseminate the truth even he was not asked. 

He said to the apostles, spread the word of God upto the ends of the world and not “preach them whenever they ask only.  

Marcos 16:15
“And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Spreading the good news is just for people to hear it as a witness to them. But the preacher cannot teach everyone. Only those whose ears God opens to be able to hear (understand) would be asking the right questions and progress towards discipleship. It is God who gives the increase in the growth of the Church.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Mang Heruino: <\/strong>Bro. Epi, by reading your exchanges w\/ howell, I am really learning a lot. Only that I came specifically across two Bible verses which appear to be literally showing opposite ideas: One quoted by Howell and the other by you.

Hebrews 6:18
“That by two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us”

Matthew 19:26 But Jesus looked at them and said to them, \u201cWith men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.\u201d
My personal take on this is that God being the God of truth will never lie hence will not go against His own words. I believe that the Bible has no contradiction but looking literally at the two verses, how can we explain that these are complimentary?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA:<\/strong>  Mang Heruino wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bro. Epi, by reading your exchanges w\/ howell, I am really learning a lot.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

You only have God to thank for if you are “really learning a lot” because it only means you are being privileged from among the many in this age to be considered a field where God sows seeds. What will happen next depends on your exercise of the freedom to choose. 

The self explanatory parable of the sower provides an insight:

Matthew 13:3 Then He spoke many things to them in parables, saying: \u201cBehold, a sower went out to sow. 4 And as he sowed, some seed fell by the wayside; and the birds came and devoured them. 5 Some fell on stony places, where they did not have much earth; and they immediately sprang up because they had no depth of earth. 6 But when the sun was up they were scorched, and because they had no root they withered away. 7 And some fell among thorns, and the thorns sprang up and choked them. 8 But others fell on good ground and yielded a crop: some a hundredfold, some sixty, some thirty. 9 He who has ears to hear, let him hear!\u201d

The Parable of the Sower Explained

Matthew 13:18 \u201cTherefore hear the parable of the sower: 19 When anyone hears the word of the kingdom, and does not understand it, then the wicked one comes and snatches away what was sown in his heart. This is he who received seed by the wayside. 20 But he who received the seed on stony places, this is he who hears the word and immediately receives it with joy; 21 yet he has no root in himself, but endures only for a while. For when tribulation or persecution arises because of the word, immediately he stumbles. 22 Now he who received seed among the thorns is he who hears the word, and the cares of this world and the deceitfulness of riches choke the word, and he becomes unfruitful. 23 But he who received seed on the good ground is he who hears the word and understands it, who indeed bears fruit and produces: some a hundredfold, some sixty, some thirty.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Mang Heruino wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Only that I came specifically across two Bible verses which appear to be literally showing opposite ideas: One quoted by Howell and the other by you.

Hebrews 6:18
“That by two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us”

Matthew 19:26 But Jesus looked at them and said to them, \u201cWith men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.\u201d

My personal take on this is that God being the God of truth will never lie hence will not go against His own words. I believe that the Bible has no contradiction but looking literally at the two verses, how can we explain that these are complimentary?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Your “personal take” is good start and yes, “the Bible has no contradiction”. 

To understand a word or phrase or bible statement, a reader should consider the context of which the word, phrase or statement is used. 

Let’s understand what is the import of the phrase “it is impossible for God to lie”.

Hebrews 6:13 For when God made a promise to Abraham, because He could swear by no one greater, He swore by Himself, 14 saying, \u201cSurely blessing I will bless you, and multiplying I will multiply you.\u201d 15 And so, after he had patiently endured, he obtained the promise. 16 For men indeed swear by the greater, and an oath for confirmation is for them an end of all dispute. 17 Thus God, determining to show more abundantly to the heirs of promise the immutability of His counsel, confirmed it by an oath, 18 that by two immutable things, in which it is impossible for God to lie, we might have strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold of the hope set before us.

The phrase “it is impossible for God to lie” is used is connection to God’s “promise to Abraham”. That God would not renege on his promise. That he would fulfill what he promised. If God does not fulfill what he promised, then God would be a liar. But God has been fulfilling what he promised to Abraham and Abraham’s descendants have been reaping blessings not because of what they do but because of what Abraham did which caused God to make the promise.

The phrase “it is impossible for God to lie” simply means that when God makes a promise, he will fulfill it.

The phrase “with God all things are possible” is used in relation to man’s salvation.

Matthew 19:23 Then Jesus said to His disciples, \u201cAssuredly, I say to you that it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. 24 And again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.\u201d 
25 When His disciples heard it, they were greatly astonished, saying, \u201cWho then can be saved?\u201d 
26 But Jesus looked at them and said to them, \u201cWith men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.\u201d 

Jesus was explaining the difficulty “for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven” because his heart would be more on his riches. His time would be occupied with the material things he could enjoy with his riches leaving him no moment to even think that his life is just but for a moment. So the kingdom of God matter is far from his priorities. 

But he is also a field in which the seeds God sows could fall. And you have read Matt 13:22 which states, “Now he who received seed among the thorns is he who hears the word, and the cares of this world and the deceitfulness of riches choke the word, and he becomes unfruitful”.

For a man to be saved, “all things are possible” with God. But if salvation depends on men, “this is impossible”.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria<\/strong>:<\/strong> Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

One of my authorities is the Online Bible Companion. See: http:\/\/www.companionbiblecondensed.com\/OT\/Genesis…pdf<\/a>

Let’s focus on “God” in Genesis 1:1. The Online Bible Companion: “God. Heb. Elohim, pl.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

What is wrong with wikipedia? It is actually so famous that lots of people are using it and besides, 
it uses different references and they could be sued if they tell things which are not true. 
It doesn’t mean you have a different reference then it is already the truth. Even if you will read different
sites about ELOHIM, almost all of them say it is really still debatable. 
And I think it is ABSURD to rely on something which is still not sure to believe that the word GOD is composed
of the Father and the son whereas lots of verses (the best basis for a belief) that tell us that the Father and the son
are 2 different being.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But you’re not showing it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

One credible site in Wikipedia shows it along with the other sites.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Your question “can you or other people ask questions regarding faith? (pls answer honestly)” was presumptive that you
know more than any of the PRMOers. I was just giving you a hint that Christians are humble people since Christ is
teaching humility. 

If you want, you can open a thread on your belief on faith and let it be subjected to scrutiny by the other posters.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

You still can’t answer directly. The question is simple and I would just rephrase it. Does your religion entertain questions
regarding faith from diff people of diff religion too. Coz our group does. Ofcorz it is not me. I am just a member
but our leader does it so well. Having a segment (question and answer) like that is not being presumptous esp 
the kind of knowledge our leader is having. Thru him, we learned that we need not worship idols. Thru him we learned
that there were no 3 kings in the bible, that there is no purgatory, that the rosary is prohibited by God, that you 
dont need to build church like those of so many people did that’s why thousand of diff religion’s names were registered,
but we just need to associate ourselves to what God had built and what the apostles had preached which is the church of God.
Is that being presumptous esp our leader always uses verse as his answers and keeps on telling people that what he is saying
is not his own since he is just reading the verse. 

He is so open actually if you have doubts on what he is preaching and would even give you time or even a healthful debate just to justify
whose beliefs is based in the bible. A debate just to show people you are good is not ryt but a debate to show people
the truth of God, the authenticity of the scripture and to justify your belief that everything is in the bible is nothing wrong.

That is what am talking about. Chance for the others to question what your leaders are preaching and what you guys are believing. 
If there is nothing like that, you tell me and that is fine. I am just asking.

And If you want me to open a thread for the others to scrutinize, which means, I would defend it then, it is an act of 
humility I guess that it is much better if I would give you guys the official sites of our group that has lots of 
topics of certain beliefs of us in the bible, and surely, your queries, questions are so welcome. I keep on telling you, 
am just a member and there is no other person in our group to start off a topic to discuss with than our leader.
That is may respect for him, and that is how confident we are. If you ask, so why are you on this forum? Just red your post
so I guess there is nothing wrong to react esp we had basis of our belief. Anyway, am not forcing anyone to believe me, And am 
sure that is also your stand. But to start off a topic. The best is the topic that our leader has already posted online. 
And will give you one example later about the “impossible for God to lie”.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

First let us be clarified about your stand on what is religion and what is Church. Whether or not these are the same.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Our leader has a post for this one. I will try to post it here for you. That is humility.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

You missed my explanation. I’ll try again.

A & B formed a partnership called A & B partnership. A & B are the two partners in the A & B partnership. A is a 
separate person from B and vice versa. A & B partnership is an entity separate and distinct from each of A & B.

God (A) and the Word (B) compose the partnership called “God”.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

That’s the problem there, you have your own explanation without any proof at all biblically. 
You said “these two form a class or family called GOD”, “The Father and Jesus are one God.”
Yours is just presumption coz you can’t prove it biblically. If there is? where is it? what verse? 
You gave us Genesis, yes the Father was talking with someone, but did it prove that the Father 
and the son (whom He was talking with) are in one entity called GOD? nope! it didn’t! So where is your proof. 
You are now insisting the hebrew word ELOHIM just to support your belief. Yes what u r using says ELOHIM is 
plural, but how will you explain the claim of the other scholars reported by diff sites that some say ELOHIM
is usually used to denote one being and that is the Father. It is still vague and debatable and not a strong basis 
to support your belief.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

If I “hurt”, I “hurt” for you because you profess to be a bible believer. We are talking with each other one on one. When
you inject a debasing comment on another before me who is not a party in our discussion, you are actually gossiping. And 
Paul discourages gossips! (1 Timothy 5:11-14)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is not a gossip, it is a fact. When we say that person is a killer, and we proved it. There is nothing wrong there. 
You are telling a fact and just want people to become cautious for them not become a victim. You are just OVERREACTING AGAIN.
That’s why I am giving you the link as a proof and not just a gossip.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Take another look at the verse. “Jesus Christ has come in the flesh” because he became flesh. 
There was a change in Christ’s nature of being spirit to flesh.

If your belief be sustained, the verse might state, “Jesus Christ has come as spirit inside the
flesh”. Which is not the case.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Christ being god is already a spirit. your phrase “Jesus christ has come as spirit inside the flesh.”
is redundant and not correct. It is like saying”A spirit has come as spirit inside the flesh.”
Christ is really a spirit being a god that has come in flesh; took upon him the form of a servant.
So rightful and so nice. =><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

You did not post the versions which render “His” and “God” as “his” and there are many. My stand is
between the two beings who co-own and co-built the Church, It is Christ who actually built it. 
The phrase “built all things” is general. The specific is Christ’s statement, “I will build my Church”. 

This is a non-issue you attempted to be one. Now I’ll wait for my other unresponded comments on your 
stand like the Father giving the commandments to Moses instead of Jesus Christ, that the Church has be 
formed even in the OT times, your stand on the great white throne judgment, your reaction to my stand 
that salvation is not the primary purpose of Christ’s death and resurrection, etc. These are more 
important and interesting issues. 

But there’s no pressure at all because you’re busy. And who is not between the two of us?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I did not post the versions which render “his” coz that is actually where you got wrong. I posted
these versions for you to understand that “his” in certain verses pertains to the Father and not to
the son as you believe.

Hebrew 3:6 (New american standard bible)
“but Christ was faithful as a Son over his house– whose house we are, if we hold fast our confidence 
and the boast of our hope firm until the end.”

HIS HOUSE. For you “his” there is Christ to prove me that it was Christ who owns and built the church.
But I gave you the other versions to prove to you that it was the Father who owns the house even in that
particular verse.

(New international version)
But Christ is faithful as a son over God’s house. And we are his house, if we hold on to our 
courage and the hope of which we boast.

(english standard version)
but Christ is faithful over God\u2019s house as a son. And we are his house if indeed we hold fast our 
confidence and our boasting in our hope.

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

so Hebrew 3:4 is still not enough for you to believe that the Father was the one who built the church!? 

Hebrew 3:4

“For every house is builded by some [man]; but he that built all things is God.”

That is your problem anyway. 

Your only valid basis is Matthew 16:18 and I understand that, but you still got it wrong. 

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

Jesus is the speaker yes, but according to Jesus also..
John 12:48
“Sapagka’t ako’y hindi nagsasalita na mula sa aking sarili; kundi ang Ama na sa akin ay nagsugo,
ay siyang nagbigay sa akin ng utos, kung ano ang dapat kong sabihin, at kung ano ang dapat kong 
salitain.”

“For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I 
should say, and what I should speak.”

who is speaking according to Jesus himself?

And it is kinda awkward to say that Jesus will build his church upon that rock if he is also the rock.
how’s that!? 
— it is now becoming non-issue for you whereas it is actually the issue coz of your thread’s title.
— Yup, the commandments during the time of Moises is from the Father. 
— yup, it is our belief, Church does exist even before Christ. 
— Judgement day? great tribulation first, then the return of Christ. 

1 Thessalonians 4:16

For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel
and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. After that, we who are
still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the 
air. And so we will be with the Lord forever. Therefore encourage each other with these words. 

1000 years rule of Christ, then comes the judgement day as to who will really be saved and not. 

— I said Christ was sent to earth primarily for salvation. 

— Every issue regarding Jesus and the Father is important including as to who built and owns it and 
you cant prove your stand. That is the summary of the story. — I assume you are also playing basketball and volleyball afterwork. =)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

u were talking about God’s not being in control of the calamities like typhoons, earthquakes,
and the like.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

When did I say God is not being in control of the calamities? when and where? 
becoz in the bible actually, earhtquake signifies God’s wrath. It is not a good practice
to add or say something which you know I never said. ok!? 

Just admit you are wrong again by telling us that God is in control. You can’t refute what I have just
explained. So stop putting words that are not mine.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

So your stand is that God and Satan are in a contest of winning souls. Poor God. Satan 
is winning!!! Don’t you think?
My stand is that there is no contest between God and Satan. Satan reports to God when God summons him.
God is just allowing man to experience to the fullest how it is to be without God on his side for a 
season.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

It’s obvious that there is a fight bet good and evil, God and satan. Dont you know that?
Efeso 16:12
“Sapagka’t ang ating pakikibaka ay hindi laban sa laman at dugo, kundi laban sa mga pamunuan, laban sa mga
kapangyarihan, laban sa mga namamahala ng kadilimang ito sa sanglibutan, laban sa mga ukol sa espiritu ng 
kasamaan sa mga dakong kaitaasan”

“For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against
the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.”

and what’s the purpose of Jesus’, prophets, apostles’ preaching? it is to disseminate the words of God which is the truth
that could lead men to salvation. 

That is why men were cautioned not to believe in every spirit becoz there are lots of false prophets that could lead their
soul to hell. 

1 John 4:1
“Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false 
prophets are gone out into the world.”

—- What do you think of father raping his daughter? lady was raped and killed brutally? rampant adultery?
bombings? war? Is this the work of God? definitely not. These are works of satan. He might have won
number of souls as it was prophesized actually in the book of revelation but who is the ultimate winner time comes?
Satan himself along with this cohorts would be punished forver. Who would be the ultimate winner in the end?
Do I need to answer this? 

— <\/strong>There is no contest bet God and satan according to you but there is a fight accodring to the bible. 
What is the purpose then of God’s willingness for us to learn His truth and Satan will be punished forver?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

God is just allowing man to experience to the fullest how it is to be without God on his side for a 
season.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is like saying that God is allowing man to kill whereas He prohibits it. God allows us to steal whereas He prohibits it.
It is like God allows us to murder and rape a lady , whereas He absolutely is against it. 
Your point is TOTALLY ILLOGICAL AND UNBIBLICAL. Sorry! It was just ridiculous for you to say that.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

So your purpose is to convict and convince people to become like you. That people who hear should be convinced.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I am pertaining to our group as a whole and not myself. It is very clear actually or you cant just say that
your group cant do what we have been doing. That’s fine anyway coz there is no other religious group so far
that has been awarded and appreciated by diff award giving bodies. That is for a fact. And that is why you cant answer me
directly.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

My stand is different as regards “preaching”. I share what I understand. I answer when asked. I act respectfully 
and esteem others better than myself because actions speak louder than words. 

When a person’s actions do not conform to what he is teaching by offending people, they will just say, “I can’t 
hear what you are shouting because your actions speak louder!”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

OUR stand of preaching? There must be leaders to preach. Not all in the church can preach but there are certain
people who can and should preach. If the apostles and Jesus had done preaching thru travelling to diff places in their 
motive of preaching the words of God to the most population. And told the apostles to preach the gospel to the whole world

Mark 16:15

“And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.”

In our time right now where technology is so advanced, we could use diff means on how to adhere on this Christ’s aspiration.
That’s why am asking you if your church also does preaching thru television, radio and internet where significant
huge number of people could hear you. And not only on this forum.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA:<\/strong>  howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What is wrong with wikipedia? It is actually so famous that lots of people are using it and besides, 
it uses different references and they could be sued if they tell things which are not true. 
It doesn’t mean you have a different reference then it is already the truth. Even if you will read different
sites about ELOHIM, almost all of them say it is really still debatable. 
And I think it is ABSURD to rely on something which is still not sure to believe that the word GOD is composed
of the Father and the son whereas lots of verses (the best basis for a belief) that tell us that the Father and the son
are 2 different being.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

You mentioned that in Gen 1:26 “God” is used in the singular and yet you disregarded the “Us” and “Our” used in describing the Gods composing the “God” who spoke. The God being who spoke the words in Gen 1:26 is the being who became Jesus Christ.

Appendix 4 to the bible companion has this to say: http:\/\/www.levendwater.org\/companion\/append4.html<\/a>

“Elohim occurs 2.700 times. Its first occurrence connects it with creation, and give it its essential meaning as the Creator. It indicates His relation to mankind as His creatures (see note on 2 Chron. 18:31, where it stands in contrast with Jehovah as indicating covenant relationship). ‘Elohim is God the Son, the living “WORD” with creature form to create (John 1:1. Col. 1:15-17. Rev. 3:14); and later, with human form to redeem (John 1:14). “Begotten of His Father before all worlds; born of His mother, in the world.” In this creature form He appeared to the Patriarchs, a form not temporarily assumed. ‘Elohim is indicated (as in A.V.) by ordinary small type, “God”. See table on page 7.” (Underscoring supplied)

You can continue to rely on Wikipedia on bible matters. I will continue with the bible companion.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

To each his own choice.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

You still can’t answer directly. The question is simple and I would just rephrase it. Does your religion entertain questions
regarding faith from diff people of diff religion too. Coz our group does. Ofcorz it is not me. I am just a member
but our leader does it so well. Having a segment (question and answer) like that is not being presumptous esp 
the kind of knowledge our leader is having. Thru him, we learned that we need not worship idols. Thru him we learned
that there were no 3 kings in the bible, that there is no purgatory, that the rosary is prohibited by God, that you 
dont need to build church like those of so many people did that’s why thousand of diff religion’s names were registered,
but we just need to associate ourselves to what God had built and what the apostles had preached which is the church of God.
Is that being presumptous esp our leader always uses verse as his answers and keeps on telling people that what he is saying
is not his own since he is just reading the verse. 

He is so open actually if you have doubts on what he is preaching and would even give you time or even a healthful debate just to justify
whose beliefs is based in the bible. A debate just to show people you are good is not ryt but a debate to show people
the truth of God, the authenticity of the scripture and to justify your belief that everything is in the bible is nothing wrong.

That is what am talking about. Chance for the others to question what your leaders are preaching and what you guys are believing. 
If there is nothing like that, you tell me and that is fine. I am just asking.

And If you want me to open a thread for the others to scrutinize, which means, I would defend it then, it is an act of 
humility I guess that it is much better if I would give you guys the official sites of our group that has lots of 
topics of certain beliefs of us in the bible, and surely, your queries, questions are so welcome. I keep on telling you, 
am just a member and there is no other person in our group to start off a topic to discuss with than our leader.
That is may respect for him, and that is how confident we are. If you ask, so why are you on this forum? Just red your post
so I guess there is nothing wrong to react esp we had basis of our belief. Anyway, am not forcing anyone to believe me, And am 
sure that is also your stand. But to start off a topic. The best is the topic that our leader has already posted online. 
And will give you one example later about the “impossible for God to lie”.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I think many in this forum are aware of what your group is doing like entertaining questions from the public as well as your open “quarrel” with the INC which even reached the courts of law.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

If the other groups are not entertaining questions on TV it doesn’t necessarily mean they are not entertaining questions from people who get near them and ask questions. 

Your participation in the PRMO forum is welcome. That makes 3 known ADDs in this forum. PRMO is open to everyone, members of church groups and even leaders are welcome if they want. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Our leader has a post for this one. I will try to post it here for you. That is humility.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

You can post what you were taught and learned.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

That’s the problem there, you have your own explanation without any proof at all biblically. 
You said “these two form a class or family called GOD”, “The Father and Jesus are one God.”
Yours is just presumption coz you can’t prove it biblically. If there is? where is it? what verse? 
You gave us Genesis, yes the Father was talking with someone, but did it prove that the Father 
and the son (whom He was talking with) are in one entity called GOD? nope! it didn’t! So where is your proof. 
You are now insisting the hebrew word ELOHIM just to support your belief. Yes what u r using says ELOHIM is 
plural, but how will you explain the claim of the other scholars reported by diff sites that some say ELOHIM
is usually used to denote one being and that is the Father. It is still vague and debatable and not a strong basis 
to support your belief.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

At least you recognize that Christ existed with the Father in OT times. The fact that the Father and Jesus are not distinguishable in the OT proves “God” in the OT refers to the family or partnership “God”.

Your statement, “yes the Father was talking with someone”, shows you don’t know that it was Christ who talked.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is not a gossip, it is a fact. When we say that person is a killer, and we proved it. There is nothing wrong there. 
You are telling a fact and just want people to become cautious for them not become a victim. You are just OVERREACTING AGAIN.
That’s why I am giving you the link as a proof and not just a gossip.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Practically everyone knows your group has a continuing quarrel with the INC. Your injecting comments about the INC beliefs which you dispute in our one on one discussion is gossip. It’s up to you if you insist it is not. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Christ being god is already a spirit. your phrase “Jesus christ has come as spirit inside the flesh.”
is redundant and not correct. It is like saying”A spirit has come as spirit inside the flesh.”
Christ is really a spirit being a god that has come in flesh; took upon him the form of a servant.
So rightful and so nice. =><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Your belief which you broadcast worldwide is this: Christ did not really die.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I did not post the versions which render “his” coz that is actually where you got wrong. I posted
these versions for you to understand that “his” in certain verses pertains to the Father and not to
the son as you believe.

Hebrew 3:6 (New american standard bible)
“but Christ was faithful as a Son over his house– whose house we are, if we hold fast our confidence 
and the boast of our hope firm until the end.”
HIS HOUSE. For you “his” there is Christ to prove me that it was Christ who owns and built the church.
But I gave you the other versions to prove to you that it was the Father who owns the house even in that
particular verse.

(New international version)
But Christ is faithful as a son over God’s house. And we are his house, if we hold on to our 
courage and the hope of which we boast.

(english standard version)
but Christ is faithful over God\u2019s house as a son. And we are his house if indeed we hold fast our 
confidence and our boasting in our hope.

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

so Hebrew 3:4 is still not enough for you to believe that the Father was the one who built the church!? 

Hebrew 3:4

“For every house is builded by some [man]; but he that built all things is God.”

That is your problem anyway. 

Your only valid basis is Matthew 16:18 and I understand that, but you still got it wrong. 

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

Jesus is the speaker yes, but according to Jesus also..
John 12:48
“Sapagka’t ako’y hindi nagsasalita na mula sa aking sarili; kundi ang Ama na sa akin ay nagsugo,
ay siyang nagbigay sa akin ng utos, kung ano ang dapat kong sabihin, at kung ano ang dapat kong 
salitain.”

“For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I 
should say, and what I should speak.”

who is speaking according to Jesus himself?

And it is kinda awkward to say that Jesus will build his church upon that rock if he is also the rock.
how’s that!? 
— it is now becoming non-issue for you whereas it is actually the issue coz of your thread’s title.
— Yup, the commandments during the time of Moises is from the Father. 
— yup, it is our belief, Church does exist even before Christ. 
— Judgement day? great tribulation first, then the return of Christ. 

1 Thessalonians 4:16

For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel
and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. After that, we who are
still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the 
air. And so we will be with the Lord forever. Therefore encourage each other with these words. 

1000 years rule of Christ, then comes the judgement day as to who will really be saved and not. 

— I said Christ was sent to earth primarily for salvation. 

— Every issue regarding Jesus and the Father is important including as to who built and owns it and 
you cant prove your stand. That is the summary of the story. — I assume you are also playing basketball and volleyball afterwork. =)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

To you God, which means the Father only, built the Church and not Christ because God “built all things”.

To me, between the two God beings who compose “God” who “built all things”, Jesus actually built the Church.

Jesus was not sent primarily for salvation. Salvation is just a remedy to correct a flaw, sin, which derailed the process of creation. Creation is the main purpose of God with Jesus as the main actor and creator.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

When did I say God is not being in control of the calamities? when and where? 
becoz in the bible actually, earhtquake signifies God’s wrath. It is not a good practice
to add or say something which you know I never said. ok!?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Actually, this is what you stated: \u201c** God is not in control for now but in the future yes He is the supreme being that would end as victorous ofcorz. How can we say He is in control for now amidst all the war, bombings, killings, adultery.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

“Killings” include the deaths in Japan and elsewhere caused by earthquakes which caused tsunamis. Your belief also means that God is powerless now to stop “war, bombings, killings, adultery”.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Just admit you are wrong again by telling us that God is in control. You can’t refute what I have just
explained. So stop putting words that are not mine.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I’ll restate my position you are missing. God is in control precisely by allowing Satan to do his thing. Satan who incites “war, bombings, killings, adultery”, can only go as far as God allows. If this is not control to you, I won’t mind it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It’s obvious that there is a fight bet good and evil, God and satan. Dont you know that?
Efeso 16:12
“Sapagka’t ang ating pakikibaka ay hindi laban sa laman at dugo, kundi laban sa mga pamunuan, laban sa mga
kapangyarihan, laban sa mga namamahala ng kadilimang ito sa sanglibutan, laban sa mga ukol sa espiritu ng 
kasamaan sa mga dakong kaitaasan”

“For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against
the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.”

and what’s the purpose of Jesus’, prophets, apostles’ preaching? it is to disseminate the words of God which is the truth
that could lead men to salvation. 

That is why men were cautioned not to believe in every spirit becoz there are lots of false prophets that could lead their
soul to hell. 

1 John 4:1
“Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false 
prophets are gone out into the world.”

—- What do you think of father raping his daughter? lady was raped and killed brutally? rampant adultery?
bombings? war? Is this the work of God? definitely not. These are works of satan. He might have won
number of souls as it was prophesized actually in the book of revelation but who is the ultimate winner time comes?
Satan himself along with this cohorts would be punished forver. Who would be the ultimate winner in the end?
Do I need to answer this? 

— There is no contest bet God and satan according to you but there is a fight accodring to the bible. 
What is the purpose then of God’s willingness for us to learn His truth and Satan will be punished forver?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

To you God is not really that powerful. He can’t stop Satan from doing more harm.

To me, there is no contest between God and Satan. God is in control. When God tells Satan how far he can go, Satan cannot go any farther.

Job 1:6 Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan also came among them. 7 And the LORD said to Satan, \u201cFrom where do you come?\u201d 
So Satan answered the LORD and said, \u201cFrom going to and fro on the earth, and from walking back and forth on it.\u201d 
8 Then the LORD said to Satan, \u201cHave you considered My servant Job, that there is none like him on the earth, a blameless and upright man, one who fears God and shuns evil?\u201d 
9 So Satan answered the LORD and said, \u201cDoes Job fear God for nothing? 10 Have You not made a hedge around him, around his household, and around all that he has on every side? You have blessed the work of his hands, and his possessions have increased in the land. 11 But now, stretch out Your hand and touch all that he has, and he will surely curse You to Your face!\u201d 
12 And the LORD said to Satan, \u201cBehold, all that he has is in your power; only do not lay a hand on his person.\u201d 
So Satan went out from the presence of the LORD.

Job 2: 1 Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them to present himself before the LORD. 2 And the LORD said to Satan, \u201cFrom where do you come?\u201d
Satan answered the LORD and said, \u201cFrom going to and fro on the earth, and from walking back and forth on it.\u201d 
3 Then the LORD said to Satan, \u201cHave you considered My servant Job, that there is none like him on the earth, a blameless and upright man, one who fears God and shuns evil? And still he holds fast to his integrity, although you incited Me against him, to destroy him without cause.\u201d 
4 So Satan answered the LORD and said, \u201cSkin for skin! Yes, all that a man has he will give for his life. 5 But stretch out Your hand now, and touch his bone and his flesh, and he will surely curse You to Your face!\u201d 
6 And the LORD said to Satan, \u201cBehold, he is in your hand, but spare his life.\u201d 

This age is not the only age of salvation. God is allowing man to experience how it really is to not having God to reign over him. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is like saying that God is allowing man to kill whereas He prohibits it. God allows us to steal whereas He prohibits it.
It is like God allows us to murder and rape a lady , whereas He absolutely is against it. 
Your point is TOTALLY ILLOGICAL AND UNBIBLICAL. Sorry! It was just ridiculous for you to say that.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Your concept of God really reduces God’s power. This is what is ridiculous!

The reason why man succumbs to Satan’s temptations is because he is not yet indwelt with the Holy Spirit which is not yet made available to everyone in this age. There is an age where the Holy Spirit will be given freely and God’s laws written in men’s hearts. 

Hebrews 10:16 \u201cThis is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, says the LORD: I will put My laws into their hearts, and in their minds I will write them,\u201d

“Those days” are not yet.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

OUR stand of preaching? There must be leaders to preach. Not all in the church can preach but there are certain
people who can and should preach. If the apostles and Jesus had done preaching thru travelling to diff places in their 
motive of preaching the words of God to the most population. And told the apostles to preach the gospel to the whole world

Mark 16:15

“And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.”

In our time right now where technology is so advanced, we could use diff means on how to adhere on this Christ’s aspiration.
That’s why am asking you if your church also does preaching thru television, radio and internet where significant
huge number of people could hear you. And not only on this forum.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

My group is preaching to all the nations the gospel of the kingdom of God. This good news of the kingdom is made clear by teaching those who have ears to hear that because of Christ’s death and resurrection, God has now resumed his creating man in his image according to his likeness. Unless one is changed to spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.

John 3:5 Jesus answered, \u201cMost assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. 6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

If one preaches that Christ did not really die, that group is not preaching the good news that man has been redeemed from the penalty of death. 

Had you read the thread “Where is the Church Jesus built”, you would not keep on asking the question what my “Church” is doing. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria<\/strong>:<\/strong> Continuation for my answer regarding your stand that:

a. God is in control even there is wickedness like war, bombings, killings, adultery, father rapes his daughter etc. that happened and happening around the globe coz for you “God is just allowing man to experience to the fullest how it is to be without God on his side for a 
season” (

b. God is allowing satan to finish his administrative duties.

c. There is no contest bet. God and satan.

(And you haven’t given any verse to support your belief on these. )<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

* God would not be God if he “is not in control for now”. While he 
is allowing Satan to be god in this age, God is in control precisely by allowing Satan to finish his administrative duties on earth. God can limit how far Satan could go as in the case of Job and he canintervene anytime in man’s affairs as he sees fit. 

* So your stand is that God and Satan are in a contest of winning souls. Poor God. Satan 
is winning!!! Don’t you think?

* My stand is that there is no contest between God and Satan. Satan reports to God when God summons him. God is just allowing man to experience to the fullest how it is to be without God on his side for a 
season. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is clear ryt!? No more! no less!  

a&b. Wickedness, evil happens not becoz God does allow it to happen, but it is becoz of the REBELLION OF SATAN, the one WHO DECEIVES the world.

Revelation 12:7-9) 
\u201cAnd there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels, and prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven. And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which DECEIVETH the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.\u201d 

Wickedness, evil happens becoz of Satan’s deceit and not becoz of God’s tolerance. A father who rapes his daughter, war, killings, bombings are works of satan and not God’s tolerance.

(James 3:15-16) 
\u201cThis wisdom descendeth not from above, but is earthly, sensual, devilish. For where envying and strife is, there is confusion and every evil work.\u201d

c. So basic, God wants us to be saved so He wants us to know and understand His truth to battle lies, evil works and not be deceived by satan. There is a battle bet. the forces of good and evil.  

Ephesians 6:12
“Sapagka’t ang ating pakikibaka ay hindi laban sa laman at dugo, kundi laban sa mga pamunuan, laban sa mga kapangyarihan, laban sa mga namamahala ng kadilimang ito sa sanglibutan, laban sa mga ukol sa espiritu ng kasamaan sa mga dakong kaitaasan.”

— I would continue this later and answer some of your questions still esp about “impossible for God.” Just need to work first. 

–I would just post here an article which is somewhat relevant with this topic and could somewhat again refute your belief that throughout the wickedness that’s happening, It is just God’s tolerance. This is from our group’s website. So proud!<\/p>\n\n\n\n

(Note: Article not quoted being too long.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA:<\/strong>  howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Continuation for my answer regarding your stand that:

a. God is in control even there is wickedness like war, bombings, killings, adultery, father rapes his daughter etc. that happened and happening around the globe coz for you “God is just allowing man to experience to the fullest how it is to be without God on his side for a 
season” (

b. God is allowing satan to finish his administrative duties.

c. There is no contest bet. God and satan.

(And you haven’t given any verse to support your belief on these. )<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

* God would not be God if he “is not in control for now”. While he 
is allowing Satan to be god in this age, God is in control precisely by allowing Satan to finish his administrative duties on earth. God can limit how far Satan could go as in the case of Job and he canintervene anytime in man’s affairs as he sees fit. 

* So your stand is that God and Satan are in a contest of winning souls. Poor God. Satan 
is winning!!! Don’t you think?

* My stand is that there is no contest between God and Satan. Satan reports to God when God summons him. God is just allowing man to experience to the fullest how it is to be without God on his side for a 
season. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is clear ryt!? No more! no less!  

a&b. Wickedness, evil happens not becoz God does allow it to happen, but it is becoz of the REBELLION OF SATAN, the one WHO DECEIVES the world.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Still the God you are portraying appears to be powerless over Satan. He can’t control Satan!

My position is that God is in control of Satan. I don’t know if you cared to read the case of Job which I posted. 

While Satan contributes and provides difficulties for man in his present state, the main reason for his travails is his choice to heed the Serpent instead of God. Had Adam and Eve and their offspring been able to eat of the tree of life, it would have been another story. 

And God allowed Satan, who Adam and Eve chose to believe to, for a season. But God’s dominance over Satan, a creature of God, is obvious. 

Genesis 3:14 So the LORD God said to the serpent: 
\u201cBecause you have done this, 
You are cursed more than all cattle, 
And more than every beast of the field; 
On your belly you shall go, 
And you shall eat dust 
All the days of your life.
15 And I will put enmity
Between you and the woman, 
And between your seed and her Seed; 
He shall bruise your head, 
And you shall bruise His heel.\u201d 

Lucifer’s 1st<\/sup> manifestation of his continuing rebellion against God happened long before God created man. After covetousness made the better of him to usurp God’s throne, Lucifer, together with the angels under him, mounted a coup de etat which was repulsed. (Ezekiel 28:11-15, Isaiah 14:12:14)

Satan’s defeat was seen by the being who became Jesus Christ. Jesus describes Satan’s fall from heaven as “like lightning”.

Luke 10:18 And He said to them, \u201cI saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven.

This rebellious ascension to heaven will be repeated in the days ahead with the same result as before.

Revelation 12:7 And war broke out in heaven: Michael and his angels fought with the dragon; and the dragon and his angels fought, 8 but they did not prevail, nor was a place found for them in heaven any longer. 9 So the great dragon was cast out, that serpent of old, called the Devil and Satan, who deceives the whole world; he was cast to the earth, and his angels were cast out with him. 

Why Satan remains in the scene is because God allows him to stay in the meantime. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Revelation 12:7-9) 
\u201cAnd there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels, and prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven. And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which DECEIVETH the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.\u201d 

Wickedness, evil happens becoz of Satan’s deceit and not becoz of God’s tolerance. A father who rapes his daughter, war, killings, bombings are works of satan and not God’s tolerance.

(James 3:15-16) 
\u201cThis wisdom descendeth not from above, but is earthly, sensual, devilish. For where envying and strife is, there is confusion and every evil work.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

As pointed out, the war in Revelation 12 is still a future occurrence. Satan’s presence in man’s affairs is by God’s tolerance.

James’ letter is addressed to the 12 tribes of Israel, which includes Jews, the majority of whom have not been given the Holy Spirit. Only a few, those whom God drew and is drawing to Christ heeded and would heed James’ words. Gentile Christians learn lessons from the letter. God is not saving everyone in this age.

James 1:1 James, a bondservant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ,

To the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad: 

Greetings.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

c. So basic, God wants us to be saved so He wants us to know and understand His truth to battle lies, evil works and not be deceived by satan. There is a battle bet. the forces of good and evil.  

Ephesians 6:12
“Sapagka’t ang ating pakikibaka ay hindi laban sa laman at dugo, kundi laban sa mga pamunuan, laban sa mga kapangyarihan, laban sa mga namamahala ng kadilimang ito sa sanglibutan, laban sa mga ukol sa espiritu ng kasamaan sa mga dakong kaitaasan.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Paul’s letter to the Ephesians, as in his other letters, is addressed to the members of the Church of God. Those people who have been gifted with the Holy Spirit. The letter is not addressed just to anybody.

Ephesians 1:1 Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, To the saints who are in Ephesus, and faithful in Christ Jesus: 

The bible student should bear in mind that the gospel, the good news of the kingdom of God, is only for those whom God is drawing to Jesus Christ in this age. In the meantime. The rest of mankind will be taught about God and his purpose on man in the age that follows the next age. To the rest of mankind in this age, the gospel is veiled and they are described as “perishing”.

2 Corinthians 4:3 But even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing…<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

— I would continue this later and answer some of your questions still esp about “impossible for God.” Just need to work first. 

–I would just post here an article which is somewhat relevant with this topic and could somewhat again refute your belief that throughout the wickedness that’s happening, It is just God’s tolerance. This is from our group’s website. So proud!<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I suggest you reread your suggested article because it is long and post what you understand if you welcome and are open to comments. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria<\/strong>: <\/strong>This is rightful.

“and upon this rock (Christ). I (the Father) will build my church.”

This suits with the other verse of the bible. 

Hebrew 3:4
“For every house is builded by some man; but he that built all things is God.”

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

2 Corinthians 1:1
“Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, and Timothy our brother, unto the church of God which is at Corinth, with all the saints which are in all Achaia:”

1 Corinthians 1:2
“Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both theirs and ours:”

God the Father is the owner and builder if the church. So biblical!  

Then what is the part of Christ in the church?

Colossians 1:18
“And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.”

Christ is the head of the church.  

It is not me who answers but the verses. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA:<\/strong>  We have different views and I can live with it. My view is available in the thread \u201cWhere is the Church Jesus built\u201d which you have no interest to read. Which doesn’t bother me at all.  

So where is your promised explanation that the Church was built long before Christ’s becoming human?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria<\/strong>: <\/strong>So does the two verses contradict?

Hebrew 6:18
“That by two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us”

Matthew 19:23-26
“23Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven. 24And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God. 25When his disciples heard it, they were exceedingly amazed, saying, Who then can be saved? 26But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible.”

The hebrew verse is so clear that it is impossible for God to lie, since He is a God of justice and truth. He can’t contradict himself. It does not contradict the Matthew verse. Why? The verse is referring to all things that are IMPOSSIBLE FOR MEN to do coz with God those things are all possible. 

Like the ex.on that verse, it is impossible for us men for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle, but with God it is possible.

There are other things which He can’t do (as mentioned above) which actually do not demote Him, but rather exalt Him more and prove that He is a God of fairness, justice and truth. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA:<\/strong> It appears to me that you didn’t read my response to Mang Heruino’s question.

Your harping of God’s limitation, of the impossible things God “can’t do” (“would not do” is my preferred phrase) reminds me of the unbeliever and bible critic who asked me, “Can your God make a stone so heavy that he cannot carry it?”

The bible student who truly wants to learn is he that accentuates the positive. That “it is impossible for God to lie” is because he fulfills what he promises. He doesn’t lie because he chooses not to.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria<\/strong>: <\/strong>James 1:17
“Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom 
is no variableness, neither shadow of turning.”

“Ang bawa’t mabuting kaloob at ang bawa’t sakdal na kaloob ay pawang buhat sa itaas, na bumababa mula sa Ama ng mga ilaw, na walang pagbabago, ni kahit anino man ng pagiiba.”

God is in the perfect state and a perfect being that will never be changed. 

MATTHEW 5:48 
“Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.”

God has always been Himself and will always be himself in His perfect state of being. 

EXODUS 3:14 
“And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.”

It follows therefore biblically speaking that there are so many things impossible to happen with God. It is impossible for Him to lie because He is in the perfect state of truth \u2013 the absolute truth.

TITUS 1:2 
“In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began\u2026”

“Sa pagasa sa buhay na walang hanggan, na ipinangako ng Dios na di makapagsisinungaling buhat pa ng mga panahong walang hanggan”
HEBREWS 6:18 That by two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us:”

“Upang sa dalawang bagay na di mababago, na diya’y di maaaring ang Dios ay magbulaan, ay mangagkaroon tayo ng isang matibay na kasiglahan, tayong nangagsitakas na sumakanlong upang mangapit sa pagasang nalalagay sa ating unahan:”

It is impossible for Him to change because perfection is the last reasonable state of change. It is impossible for Him to deny himself because He is the absolute state of existence. 
II TIMOTHY 2:13
“If we believe not, yet he abideth faithful: he cannot deny himself.”

“13 Kung tayo’y hindi mga tapat, siya’y nananatiling tapat; sapagka’t hindi makapagkakaila sa kaniyang sarili.”

It is idiotic to attribute to God anything that is a product of human comprehension and understanding. 

THE ROMANS 11:34
“For who hath known the mind of the Lord? or who hath been his counselor?”

“Sapagka’t sino ang nakaalam ng pagiisip ng Panginoon? o sino ang kaniyang naging kasangguni?”

In fact, the Bible admonishes us not to think of anything more than we ought to think, especially about the being of God. 

THE ROMANS 12:3 
“For I say, through the grace given unto me, to every man that is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think; but to think soberly, according as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith.”

“Sapagka’t sinasabi ko, sa pamamagitan ng biyaya na sa akin ay ibinigay, sa bawa’t tao sa inyo, na huwag magisip sa kaniyang sarili ng totoong matayog kay sa nararapat niyang isipin; kundi magisip na may kahinahunan, ayon sa kasukatan ng pananampalataya na ibinahagi ng Dios sa bawa’t isa.”

To think and to conclude that God can do everything constitutes an insult and blasphemy unto the unfathomable majesty of the Most High. As it is unwise to put limits to Him, it is equally unwise to put elasticity to thelimits set by God for Himself. 

We know that He cannot lie because He revealed it through His written words in the Bible. He cannot change himself; He cannot deny himself and so on. To say and make others believe that God can doanything or everything will be an insult and blasphemy against God. 

Will it be possible for Him to connive with satan? 
II CORINTHIANS 6:14
“Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?”

“Huwag kayong makipamatok ng kabilan sa mga di nagsisisampalataya: sapagka’t anong pakikisama mayroon ang katuwiran at kalikuan? o anong pakikisama mayroon ang kaliwanagan sa kadiliman?”

Is it possible for him to be an author of confusion? 

I CORINTHIANS 14:33

“For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.”

“Sapagka’t ang Dios ay hindi Dios ng kaguluhan, kundi ng kapayapaan. Gaya sa lahat ng mga iglesia ng mga banal,”

Is it possible for Him to forget or neglect his children? 
ISAIAH 49:15

“Can a woman forget her sucking child, that she should not have compassion on the son of her womb? yea, they may forget, yet will I not forget thee.”

“Malilimutan ba ng babae ang kaniyang batang pasusuhin; na siya’y hindi mahahabag sa anak ng kaniyang bahay-bata? oo, ito’y makalilimot, nguni’t hindi kita kalilimutan.”

Is it possible for Him to betray the trust of His children? 

I CORINTHIANS 1:9

“God is faithful, by whom ye were called unto the fellowship of his Son Jesus Christ our Lord. 
The verses cited after each question prove that there are many things which are impossible to God. I pray for your
enlightenment.”

“Ang Dios ay tapat, na sa pamamagitan niya ay tinawag kayo sa pakikisama ng kaniyang anak na si Jesucristo na Panginoon natin.”

The verses cited after each question prove that there are many things which are impossible to God.

* Summary of the article above which is so comprehensive, so logical, so rigthful and so biblical. Do we hear this wisdom from the other preachers? Thanks be to God for giving us our leader.  

http:\/\/www.esoriano.wordpress.com<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA:<\/strong>  howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The verses cited after each question prove that there are many things which are impossible to God.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

And to you, the material glorifies God?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

* Summary of the article above which is so comprehensive, so logical, so rigthful and so biblical. Do we hear this wisdom from the other preachers? Thanks be to God for giving us our leader. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

A question of first importance is: Did Christ really die?

While respect and awe to one’s bible teacher is commendable, a bible student should not overlook the fact that the real teacher is Jesus Christ.

As regards man’s salvation, the change from immortal to mortal of a God being was made possible and actual. The Spirit Word became flesh which demoted him to a level lower than angels that he might taste death for everyone. And the flesh and blood changed spirit died.

Hebrews 2:9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels, for the suffering of death crowned with glory and honor, that He, by the grace of God, might taste death for everyone.

If a person who has heard the gospel preached but believes that Christ did not really die because it was only his body which died and, allegedly, Christ just escaped from the body, which was beaten black and blue, to survive, the preaching Paul did is in vain as to the person.

1 Corinthians 15:1 Moreover, brethren, I declare to you the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received and in which you stand, 2 by which also you are saved, if you hold fast that word which I preached to you\u2014unless you believed in vain.

When a bible teacher teaches that Christ did not really die, the bible student should check what the bible really says and in case of conflict, believe Paul.

1 Corinthians 15:3 For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died…4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures…<\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria<\/strong>: <\/strong>howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

James 1:17
“Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom\u00a0
is no variableness, neither shadow of turning.”

“Ang bawa’t mabuting kaloob at ang bawa’t sakdal na kaloob ay pawang buhat sa itaas, na bumababa mula sa Ama ng mga ilaw, na walang pagbabago, ni kahit anino man ng pagiiba.”

God is in the perfect state and a perfect being that will never be changed.\u00a0

MATTHEW 5:48\u00a0
“Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.”

God has always been Himself and will always be himself in His perfect state of being.\u00a0

EXODUS 3:14\u00a0
“And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.”

It follows therefore biblically speaking that there are so many things impossible to happen with God.\u00a0It is impossible for Him to lie because He is in the perfect state of truth \u2013 the absolute truth.
TITUS 1:2\u00a0
“In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began\u2026”

“Sa pagasa sa buhay na walang hanggan, na ipinangako ng Dios na di makapagsisinungaling buhat pa ng mga panahong walang hanggan”

HEBREWS 6:18 That by two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us:”

“Upang sa dalawang bagay na di mababago, na diya’y di maaaring ang Dios ay magbulaan, ay mangagkaroon tayo ng isang matibay na kasiglahan, tayong nangagsitakas na sumakanlong upang mangapit sa pagasang nalalagay sa ating unahan:”

It is impossible for Him to change because perfection is the last reasonable state of change. It is impossible for Him to deny himself because He is the absolute state of existence.\u00a0
II TIMOTHY 2:13
“If we believe not, yet he abideth faithful: he cannot deny himself.”

“13 Kung tayo’y hindi mga tapat, siya’y nananatiling tapat; sapagka’t hindi makapagkakaila sa kaniyang sarili.”

It is idiotic to attribute to God anything that is a product of human comprehension and understanding.\u00a0

THE ROMANS 11:34
“For who hath known the mind of the Lord? or who hath been his counselor?”

“Sapagka’t sino ang nakaalam ng pagiisip ng Panginoon? o sino ang kaniyang naging kasangguni?”

In fact, the Bible admonishes us not to think of anything more than we ought to think, especially about the being of God.\u00a0

THE ROMANS 12:3\u00a0
“For I say, through the grace given unto me, to every man that is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think; but to think soberly, according as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith.”

“Sapagka’t sinasabi ko, sa pamamagitan ng biyaya na sa akin ay ibinigay, sa bawa’t tao sa inyo, na huwag magisip sa kaniyang sarili ng totoong matayog kay sa nararapat niyang isipin; kundi magisip na may kahinahunan, ayon sa kasukatan ng pananampalataya na ibinahagi ng Dios sa bawa’t isa.”

To think and to conclude that God can do everything constitutes an insult and blasphemy unto the unfathomable majesty of the Most High. As it is unwise to put limits to Him, it is equally unwise to put elasticity to thelimits set by God for Himself.\u00a0

We know that He cannot lie because He revealed it through His written words in the Bible. He cannot change himself; He cannot deny himself and so on. To say and make others believe that God can doanything or everything will be an insult and blasphemy against God.\u00a0

Will it be possible for Him to connive with satan?\u00a0
II CORINTHIANS 6:14
“Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?”

“Huwag kayong makipamatok ng kabilan sa mga di nagsisisampalataya: sapagka’t anong pakikisama mayroon ang katuwiran at kalikuan? o anong pakikisama mayroon ang kaliwanagan sa kadiliman?”

Is it possible for him to be an author of confusion?\u00a0

I CORINTHIANS 14:33

“For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.”

“Sapagka’t ang Dios ay hindi Dios ng kaguluhan, kundi ng kapayapaan. Gaya sa lahat ng mga iglesia ng mga banal,”

Is it possible for Him to forget or neglect his children?\u00a0

ISAIAH 49:15

“Can a woman forget her sucking child, that she should not have compassion on the son of her womb? yea, they may forget, yet will I not forget thee.”

“Malilimutan ba ng babae ang kaniyang batang pasusuhin; na siya’y hindi mahahabag sa anak ng kaniyang bahay-bata? oo, ito’y makalilimot, nguni’t hindi kita kalilimutan.”

Is it possible for Him to betray the trust of His children?\u00a0

I CORINTHIANS 1:9

“God is faithful, by whom ye were called unto the fellowship of his Son Jesus Christ our Lord.\u00a0
The verses cited after each question prove that there are many things which are impossible to God. I pray for your
enlightenment.”

“Ang Dios ay tapat, na sa pamamagitan niya ay tinawag kayo sa pakikisama ng kaniyang anak na si Jesucristo na Panginoon natin.”

The verses cited after each question prove that there are many things which are impossible to God.

* Summary of the article above which is so comprehensive, so logical, so rigthful and so biblical. Do we hear this wisdom from the other preachers?\u00a0Thanks be to God for giving us our leader.\u00a0\u00a0
http:\/\/www.esoriano.wordpress.com<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

No comment on this one!? Yes! Relax! I would answer you one by one to prove to you that our belief is all biblically right! I am looking for my old notes coz I forgot the verses (I only remember one for now) bout the topic “church existed even before Christ”.
I would not haved said that If I know I got no basis in the bible.  

So how are you gonna refute this post since you’re believing that God can do all things!
I repost it since you didn’t answer this yet. I am leaving anyway from the office. See you! <\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA:<\/strong> It appears that you are reading only your own posts. I have posted my comments above and the wise will understand.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria<\/strong>:  <\/strong>Was this your comment? 

Almeda: “And to you, the material glorifies God?”

OK! I am not wise! That is fine. If this response of you still means you are against my post regarding the so CLEAR, COMPREHENSIVE, LOGICAL & BIBLICAL explanation that GOD CAN’T DO ALL THINGS.

Could you please elaborate your comment. Coz I honestly can’t apprehend it. Thanks.  

I will repost it for you coz honestly, I am so proud. Not proud of myself but of our leader since it was his article and I just summarized it as you requested, but still the GLORY is to the Father.  <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA:<\/strong>  howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Was this your comment? 

Almeda: “And to you, the material glorifies God?”

OK! I am not wise! That is fine. If this response of you still means you are against my post regarding the so CLEAR, COMPREHENSIVE, LOGICAL & BIBLICAL explanation that GOD CAN’T DO ALL THINGS.

Could you please elaborate your comment. Coz I honestly can’t apprehend it. Thanks. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote (in response to another\u2019s comment):<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Nope! God can’t do all things. That is our stand. Unlike Almeda, their god can do all things!<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I’ll repost my response to Mang Heruino’s querry:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Your “personal take” is good start and yes, “the Bible has no contradiction”. 

To understand a word or phrase or bible statement, a reader should consider the context of which the word, phrase or statement is used. 

Let’s understand what is the import of the phrase “it is impossible for God to lie”.

Hebrews 6:13 For when God made a promise to Abraham, because He could swear by no one greater, He swore by Himself, 14 saying, \u201cSurely blessing I will bless you, and multiplying I will multiply you.\u201d 15 And so, after he had patiently endured, he obtained the promise. 16 For men indeed swear by the greater, and an oath for confirmation is for them an end of all dispute. 17 Thus God, determining to show more abundantly to the heirs of promise the immutability of His counsel, confirmed it by an oath, 18 that by two immutable things, in which it is impossible for God to lie, we might have strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold of the hope set before us.

The phrase “it is impossible for God to lie” is used is connection to God’s “promise to Abraham”. That God would not renege on his promise. That he would fulfill what he promised. If God does not fulfill what he promised, then God would be a liar. But God has been fulfilling what he promised to Abraham and Abraham’s descendants have been reaping blessings not because of what they do but because of what Abraham did which caused God to make the promise.

The phrase “it is impossible for God to lie” simply means that when God makes a promise, he will fulfill it.

The phrase “with God all things are possible” is used in relation to man’s salvation.

Matthew 19:23 Then Jesus said to His disciples, \u201cAssuredly, I say to you that it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. 24 And again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.\u201d 
25 When His disciples heard it, they were greatly astonished, saying, \u201cWho then can be saved?\u201d 
26 But Jesus looked at them and said to them, \u201cWith men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.\u201d 

Jesus was explaining the difficulty “for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven” because his heart would be more on his riches. His time would be occupied with the material things he could enjoy with his riches leaving him no moment to even think that his life is just but for a moment. So the kingdom of God matter is far from his priorities. 

But he is also a field in which the seeds God sows could fall. And you have read Matt 13:22 which states, “Now he who received seed among the thorns is he who hears the word, and the cares of this world and the deceitfulness of riches choke the word, and he becomes unfruitful”.

For a man to be saved, “all things are possible” with God. But if salvation depends on men, “this is impossible”.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The bible student should grasp the context to which the word, phrase or statement is used to understand the message conveyed.

Another example of a supposedly questionable bible phrase is that God “knows all things”. 

1 John 3:20 For if our heart condemns us, God is greater than our heart, and knows all things.

Those who will look for the falsity of this phrase that God “knows all things”, hence the inaccuracy of the bible, will point out a bible verse which shows that God doesn’t “know all things”. 

When Abraham chose to obey God to kill Isaac, it was only at this point when God knew of Abraham’s decision. 

Genesis 22:12 And He said, \u201cDo not lay your hand on the lad, or do anything to him; for now I know that you fear God, since you have not withheld your son, your only son, from Me.\u201d 

Before Abraham made the decision to obey God no matter what, God did not know what Abraham’s choice would be. But this doesn’t mean that the phrase in 1 John 3:20 that God “know all things” is a falsity and should be a basis for teaching that God doesn’t know all things in like manner as teaching that there are things that are impossible for God to do.

The usage of a word, phrase or statement should be considered for a better understanding. As pointed out in my response to Mang Heruino, “it is impossible for God to lie” does not clash with Jesus’ statement, “with God all things are possible”.
————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I will repost it for you coz honestly, I am so proud. Not proud of myself but of our leader since it was his article and I just summarized it as you requested, but still the GLORY is to the Father.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I suggest you open threads for your leader’s articles which are unrelated to this thread’s topic. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria<\/strong>:<\/strong> Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We have different views and I can live with it. My view is available in the thread Where is the Church Jesus built which you have no interest to read. Which doesn’t bother me at all.  

So where is your promised explanation that the Church was built long before Christ’s becoming human?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

(tried to repost for clarity of our stand )

We will use your given verse as to who really built the church coz for you it was Christ but accdg. to the bible or other verses, it was the Father.

(My previous post)

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

Jesus is the speaker yes, but according to Jesus also..
John 12:48
“Sapagka’t ako’y hindi nagsasalita na mula sa aking sarili; kundi ang Ama na sa akin ay nagsugo,ay siyang nagbigay sa akin ng utos, kung ano ang dapat kong sabihin, at kung ano ang dapat kong salitain.”

“For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak.”

who is speaking according to Jesus himself?
And it is kinda awkward to say that Jesus will build his church upon that rock if he is also the rock. 

It is like this..

“And upon this rock (Christ), I (Christ) will build my church.” 

This is kinda awkward ryt!? 

So what is the proof that Christ is the rock to whom the church was built 
upon. 

Biblically speaking, Peter cannot be the rock upon which the church was built, simply because he was part of the church, built upon the foundation stone who is Christ.

EPHESIANS 2:20-22
21 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;
21 In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto a holy temple in the Lord:
22 In whom ye also are builded together for a habitation of God through the Spirit.

“Na mga itinatayo sa ibabaw ng kinasasaligan ng mga apostol at ng mga propeta, na si Cristo Jesus din ang pangulong bato sa panulok; Na sa kaniya’y ang buong gusali, na nakalapat na mabuti, ay lumalago upang maging isang templong banal sa Panginoon; Na sa kaniya’y itinayo naman kayo upang maging tahanan ng Dios sa Espiritu.”

The Apostles (one of whom was Peter) were built upon the foundation, Jesus Christ himself. There is no other foundation than Christ!

I CORINTHIANS 3:11
“For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.”

“Sapagka’t sinoman ay hindi makapaglalagay ng ibang pinagsasaligan, kundi ang nalalagay na, na ito’y si Cristo Jesus.”

(summary of the above article about Peter is not the rock where church was built upon)

Jesus being the rock to whom the church was built upon is so rigthful. Jesus is the foundation (which you have asked as I remember), but the Father was the one who built it. 

“and upon this rock (Christ). I (the Father) will build my church.”

This suits with the other verse of the bible. 

Hebrew 3:4
“For every house is builded by some man; but he that built all things is God.”

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

2 Corinthians 1:1
“Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, and Timothy our brother, unto the church of God which is at Corinth, with all the saints which are in all Achaia:”

1 Corinthians 1:2
“Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both theirs and ours:”

God the Father is the owner and builder of the church. So biblical!  

Then what is the part of Christ in the church?

Colossians 1:18
“And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.”

Christ is the head of the church.  

** Just like you, I won’t be bothered if you won’t believe our faith.  
Lots of verses prove that the Father is the builder, Christ (the rock) is the foundation and the head of the church. 

** You only used Matthew 16:18, (just to prove church was built by Jesus) yet the other verses explained it further to prove it was really the Father. (which you can’t dispute and needed to say God is composed of two beings (which you cant prove at the same time ) just to say Christ is the co-owner and co-builder of the church so there is no issue as to who built it, but your thread’s title is emphasizing on Christ who built the church for you)  

** Anyway, I would stick to what Jesus had preached and where the apostles had been called. Where was that?

1 Corinthians 1:1-2

“Si Pablo, na tinawag na maging apostol ni Jesucristo sa pamamagitan ng kalooban ng Dios, at si Sostenes na ating kapatid, Sa iglesia ng Dios na nasa Corinto…”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA:<\/strong>  I’ve reasoned with the other PRMOers pointing out that Jesus is the Rock. You keep on telling me it’s not Peter. A waste of time and effort for you.

You say it was the Father who spoke “I will build my Church”, I say it was Jesus. The Father is yet to be revealed. No one has heard his voice save Jesus. It is only when man shall have been changed to spirit when the Father is revealed and can be seen by man (1 John 3:2).

Now, where is your explanation that the Church has been built long before Christ spoke “I will (future) build my Church”?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria<\/strong>:<\/strong> Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I think many in this forum are aware of what your group is doing like entertaining questions from the public as well as your open “quarrel” with the INC which even reached the courts of law. 

If the other groups are not entertaining questions on TV doesn’t necessarily mean they are not entertaining questions from people who get near them and ask questions. 

Your participation in the PRMO forum is welcome. That makes 3 known ADDs in this forum. PRMO is open to everyone, members of church groups and even leaders are welcome if they want. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

So what would be the most efficient way of educating (regarding faith) the most no. people about queries of the other people? becoz we are not only after the every single person that asks, but also to many that can heareth and watch it.
It is televesion, radio and internet ryt!? technology!  

This is way better (means of propagation) than “entertaining questions from people who get near them.”  

Anyway, that answers my question. Your group doesn’t have that public open forum regarding faith and the biblea. That is fine don’t worry! <\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA:<\/strong>  You are judgmental without getting all the facts to come up with a sound judgment. You remain ignorant of my group because you didn’t care to read the thread “Where is the Church Jesus built”.

I’ll tell you a little. The COG group from where I first learned about God through correspondence course, used radio as radio was then the latest mass com medium, then TV, magazines and booklets distributed worldwide. The gospel of the kingdom of God has been continually preached including current world events relating these to bible prophesies. 

I was taught about the identity of the modern day descendants of Israel and how their blessings and cursing impact the other nations. The rise and fall of nations in the present had been disseminated even shortly after the end of WW2. That group predicted the reunification of the then divided Germany at a time when the Berlin wall was just being constructed. When Germany reunited decades later, inquiries were directed to my then group as to what would happen next.

My group believes that the Church of God is a spiritual body spread out in all nations the real members of which are not confined in my particular group or just one humanly organized group. There are many “churches” spread out in nations. And each group is composed not only of persons imbued by the Holy Spirit but also those who belong to the enemy (Parable of the Wheat and Tares). But there is only one Church of God being composed of many members who are spread out and who belong to different groups.

My group, foremost, believes that Christ died paying the penalty of sin. And Christ was raised back to his previous nature of being immortal and is now working with the Father in fashioning, first the few saved in this age, men to conform to his image and eventually to change them according to his likeness of being a spirit at Christ’s return.

The rest of mankind who have since died will be raised back to physical life during the great white throne judgment. “Judgment” is a period of time just as the members of the “house” of God now are being judged. They will be taught, many for the first time, the “biblios”. They will be given the Holy Spirit to equip and enable them to understand God and his purpose for them. Many will choose, by the exercise of their freewill, to make God reign over them. And they will join those ahead as spirits after being so changed and enter the kingdom of God. Then the spirit sons of God will address the now barren and lifeless and ever expanding universe.

This has been my stand since I joined PRMO.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria<\/strong>:<\/strong> Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Nothing is impossible for God. God made the Word mortal for the purpose of death. And Jesus died.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is where I started contesting that not everything is possible with God. You then gave the verse that says “with God all things are possible.” Your explanation was it is in relation with man’s salvation that everything is possible with God. Though we have diff understanding for that, (coz ours is everything that is impossible with men, all are possible with God like that ex in that given verse about how the richman would pass through that needle hole) atleast we both agree that the two verses, “impossible for God to lie”, “with God all things are possible” do not contradict. That is fine with me and I appreciate that ofcorz.

But, you should have said, “God is powerful enough to make the word mortal…” (This is not our belief pero sinusundan lang kita as an ex.)  

But again there is an issue. What is that? Here.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Your harping of God’s limitation, of the impossible things God “can’t do” 
(“would not do” is my preferred phrase) reminds me of the unbeliever and bible critic who asked me, “Can your God make a stone so heavy that he cannot carry it?”

The bible student who truly wants to learn is he that accentuates the positive. 
That “it is impossible for God to lie” is because he fulfills what he promises. 
He doesn’t lie because he chooses not to.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

* CAN’T DO is different from WOULDN’T DO. I know you would agree coz as what you have said, “WOULD NOT DO” was your preferred phrase. Your belief is like, GOD CAN STILL LIE, it is just that, HE WOULD NOT DO IT. Am I ryt!? 

That is why you have said this, “HE DOESN’T LIE BECOZ HE CHOOSES NOT TO.” meaning for you, STILL GOD CAN LIE IF HE CHOOSES TO. ryt!? 

* This is the issue that am gonna dispute again. 

Titus 1:2
“In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began\u2026”

The bible used the word “CANNOT” and not your preferred word “WOULD NOT”, that is the first point there.

“CANNOT LIE” meaning, He does not have the capacity to lie, not even an aspiration to lie becoz He is the God of truth and a God that is in the state of perfection that cannot be and will never be changed.

James 1:17 
“Ang bawa’t mabuting kaloob at ang bawa’t sakdal na kaloob ay pawang buhat sa itaas,
na bumababa mula sa Ama ng mga ilaw, na walang pagbabago, ni kahit anino man ng pagiiba.”

MATTHEW 5:48 
“Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.”

It is impossible for Him to lie because He is in the perfect state of truth \u2013 the absolute truth. (EFS)

Impossible meaning, He CANNOT, and not he WOULD NOT. 

Impossible, adj. incapable of being done, unattainable, cannot be done. 

It is simply saying, “A man cannot fly.” or “It is impossible for a man to fly.”
You can’t use your preferred word “WOULD NOT” and “CHOOSES NOT TO”, becoz a man is incapable of flying. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA:<\/strong>  howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But, you should have said, “God is powerful enough to make the word mortal…” (This is not our belief pero sinusundan lang kita as an ex.) <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Unlike your position, God’s power is beyond doubt to me. So I stand by how I constructed my previous statement, “God made the Word mortal for the purpose of death”.

Hebrews 2:9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels, for the suffering of death…

Your position that Christ did not die shows your belief is that God has no power to make an immortal mortal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But again there is an issue. What is that? Here.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Your harping of God’s limitation, of the impossible things God “can’t do” 
(“would not do” is my preferred phrase) reminds me of the unbeliever and bible critic who asked me, “Can your God make a stone so heavy that he cannot carry it?”

The bible student who truly wants to learn is he that accentuates the positive. 
That “it is impossible for God to lie” is because he fulfills what he promises. 
He doesn’t lie because he chooses not to.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

* CAN’T DO is different from WOULDN’T DO. I know you would agree coz as what you have said, “WOULD NOT DO” was your preferred phrase. Your belief is like, GOD CAN STILL LIE, it is just that, HE WOULD NOT DO IT. Am I ryt!? 

That is why you have said this, “HE DOESN’T LIE BECOZ HE CHOOSES NOT TO.” meaning for you, STILL GOD CAN LIE IF HE CHOOSES TO. ryt!? 

* This is the issue that am gonna dispute again. 

Titus 1:2
“In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began\u2026”

The bible used the word “CANNOT” and not your preferred word “WOULD NOT”, that is the first point there.

“CANNOT LIE” meaning, He does not have the capacity to lie, not even an aspiration to lie becoz He is the God of truth and a God that is in the state of perfection that cannot be and will never be changed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

You did not quote the versions which render “cannot lie” as “does not lie”. Here are just two:

Titus 1:2 (New International Version, \u00a92011) in the hope of eternal life, which God, who does not lie, promised before the beginning of time,

Titus 1:2 (New Living Translation) This truth gives them confidence that they have eternal life, which God\u2014who does not lie\u2014promised them before the world began.

As pointed out, the “lie” in “it is impossible for God to lie” is in the context of fulfillment of what is promised. God made a promise to Abraham which extends to his descendants and God fulfilled the promise despite the disobedience of those descendants.

I maintain my position of “would not”, being of the same import as “does not”, because God himself has freewill. He would not lie because he chooses not to. When man already reaches that point of having been made in God’s image of love and changed to the likeness of God which is spirit, that man retains the freewill he now has. That man will be like God who has the capacity to sin but would choose not to.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

James 1:17 
“Ang bawa’t mabuting kaloob at ang bawa’t sakdal na kaloob ay pawang buhat sa itaas,
na bumababa mula sa Ama ng mga ilaw, na walang pagbabago, ni kahit anino man ng pagiiba.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

James 1:17 Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and comes down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shadow of turning.

I don’t see any relevance of this verse to the issue you raised.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

MATTHEW 5:48 
“Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

No relevance of this verse either to the topic at hand.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is impossible for Him to lie because He is in the perfect state of truth \u2013 the absolute truth. (EFS)

Impossible meaning, He CANNOT, and not he WOULD NOT. 

Impossible, adj. incapable of being done, unattainable, cannot be done.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

We disagree. If you’ll ponder more on your belief, you just removed God’s freedom to choose. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is simply saying, “A man cannot fly.” or “It is impossible for a man to fly.”
You can’t use your preferred word “WOULD NOT” and “CHOOSES NOT TO”, becoz a man is incapable of flying. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

“man is incapable of flying” is inaccurate. Don’t under estimate man, a creature being fashioned to be like God. The bible even states that men left to their own, “nothing that they propose to do will be withheld from them”.

Genesis 11:1 Now the whole earth had one language and one speech. 2 And it came to pass, as they journeyed from the east, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar, and they dwelt there. 3 Then they said to one another, \u201cCome, let us make bricks and bake them thoroughly.\u201d They had brick for stone, and they had asphalt for mortar. 4 And they said, \u201cCome, let us build ourselves a city, and a tower whose top is in the heavens; let us make a name for ourselves, lest we be scattered abroad over the face of the whole earth.\u201d
5 But the LORD came down to see the city and the tower which the sons of men had built. 6 And the LORD said, \u201cIndeed the people are one and they all have one language, and this is what they begin to do; now nothing that they propose to do will be withheld from them.

Man’s potential is to become a spirit being like God. Man will be reaching even the farthest star from earth in the ever expanding universe.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria<\/strong>:<\/strong> Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Unlike your position, God’s power is beyond doubt to me. So I stand by how I constructed my previous statement, “God made the Word mortal for the purpose of death”.

Hebrews 2:9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels, for the suffering of death…

Your position that Christ did not die shows your belief is that God has no power to make an immortal mortal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I am gonna start a thread exclusively for this topic. Dont worry ok!?  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

You did not quote the versions which render “cannot lie” as “does not lie”. Here are just two:

Titus 1:2 (New International Version, \u00a92011) in the hope of eternal life, which God, who does not lie, promised before the beginning of time,

Titus 1:2 (New Living Translation) This truth gives them confidence that they have eternal life, which God\u2014who does not lie\u2014promised them before the world began.

As pointed out, the “lie” in “it is impossible for God to lie” is in the context of fulfillment of what is promised. God made a promise to Abraham which extends to his descendants and God fulfilled the promise despite the disobedience of the those descendants.

I maintain my position of “would not”, being of the same import as “does not”, because God himself has freewill. He would not lie because he chooses not to. When man already reaches that point of having been made in God’s image of love and changed to the likeness of God which is spirit, that man retains the freewill he now has. That man will be like God who has the capacity to sin but would choose not to.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Your given verse that says “which God, Who doesn’t lie” does not even prove that God does lie. It is absolutely opposite of what the bible is saying. It is just you who says He can lie if he chooses to without any proof in the bible. Where as the bible is telling us the exact opposite of what you are saying.

Titus 1:2
“In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began;”

but still you are saying, He can if He chooses to.
Even a couple of versions used “God that doesn’t lie”, MOST OF DIFF. VERSIONS used CANNOT.

-New American Standard Bible (\u00a91995)
“in the hope of eternal life, which God, who cannot lie, promised long ages ago,”

-American King James Version
“In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began;”

-American Standard Version
“in hope of eternal life, which God, who cannot lie, promised before times eternal;”

-Darby Bible Translation
“in the hope of eternal life, which God, who cannot lie, promised before the ages of time,”

-English Revised Version
“in hope of eternal life, which God, who cannot lie, promised before times eternal;”

-Tyndale New Testament
“which truth is in serving God in hope of eternal life, which life God cannot lie, hath promissed before the world began:”

-Webster’s Bible Translation
“In hope of eternal life, which God, who cannot lie, promised before the world began;”

-World English Bible
“in hope of eternal life, which God, who can’t lie, promised before time began;”

Most of scholars who translated the bible used the word CANNOT (and I dont think you are more right than them) and in the other verse IMPOSSIBLE TO LIE becoz that is the essence there, HE HAS NO CAPACITY TO LIE. Impossible, meaning He is INCAPABLE OF DOING LYING. Becoz He is the GOD OF TRUTH. He is perfect. No lies. Just the truth. He cannot be called God of truth if He can lie. Why? Becoz lie is of SATAN, THE DEVIL.
John 8:44

“Kayo’y sa inyong amang diablo, at ang mga nais ng inyong ama ang ibig ninyong gawin. Siya’y isang mamamatay-tao buhat pa nang una, at hindi nananatili sa katotohanan, sapagka’t walang katotohanan sa kaniya. Pagka nagsasalita siya ng kasinungalingan, ay nagsasalita siya ng sa ganang kaniya: sapagka’t siya’y isang sinungaling, at ama nito.”

“Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it. “

And He being in the state of perfection and absolute truth will not change EVER.

James 1:17 
“Ang bawa’t mabuting kaloob at ang bawa’t sakdal na kaloob ay pawang buhat sa itaas,
na bumababa mula sa Ama ng mga ilaw, na walang pagbabago, ni kahit anino man ng pagiiba.”

“Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and comes down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shadow of turning.”
And this is exactly what the other versions tell us, He NEVER, EVER lies becoz He is the God of truth.

-GOD’S WORD\u00ae Translation (\u00a91995)
“My message is based on the confidence of eternal life. God, who NEVER LIES, promised this eternal life before the world began.”

-Bible in basic english
In the hope of eternal life, which was made certain before eternal time, by the word of God who is EVER TRUE;

-Weymouth New Testament
“in hope of the Life of the Ages which God, who is NEVER FALSE to His word, promised before the commencement of the Ages.”

Everything is actually clear. EFS said “As it is unwise to put limits to Him, it is equally unwise to put elasticity to the limits set by God for Himself.”

And it is so good to believe that He is the God of truth, that is perfect and cannot lie. 

If you still believe that He can do everything, it is just that He chooses not to do it. 
Then I want you to answer this.

Will it be possible for Him to connive with satan? 
II CORINTHIANS 6:14
“Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?”

“Huwag kayong makipamatok ng kabilan sa mga di nagsisisampalataya: sapagka’t anong pakikisama mayroon ang katuwiran at kalikuan? o anong pakikisama mayroon ang kaliwanagan sa kadiliman?”

Is it possible for him to be an author of confusion? 
I CORINTHIANS 14:33
“For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.”

“Sapagka’t ang Dios ay hindi Dios ng kaguluhan, kundi ng kapayapaan. Gaya sa lahat ng mga iglesia ng mga banal,”

Is it possible for Him to betray the trust of His children? 

I CORINTHIANS 1:9
“God is faithful, by whom ye were called unto the fellowship of his Son Jesus Christ our Lord. 
The verses cited after each question prove that there are many things which are impossible to God. I pray for your
enlightenment.”
“Ang Dios ay tapat, na sa pamamagitan niya ay tinawag kayo sa pakikisama ng kaniyang anak na si Jesucristo na Panginoon natin.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

“man is incapable of flying” is inaccurate. Don’t under estimate man, a creature being fashioned to be like God. The bible even states that men left to their own, “nothing that they propose to do will be withheld from them”.

Genesis 11:1 Now the whole earth had one language and one speech. 2 And it came to pass, as they journeyed from the east, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar, and they dwelt there. 3 Then they said to one another, \u201cCome, let us make bricks and bake them thoroughly.\u201d They had brick for stone, and they had asphalt for mortar. 4 And they said, \u201cCome, let us build ourselves a city, and a tower whose top is in the heavens; let us make a name for ourselves, lest we be scattered abroad over the face of the whole earth.\u201d
5 But the LORD came down to see the city and the tower which the sons of men had built. 6 And the LORD said, \u201cIndeed the people are one and they all have one language, and this is what they begin to do; now nothing that they propose to do will be withheld from them.

Man’s potential is to become a spirit being like God. Man will be reaching even the farthest star from earth in the ever expanding universe.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Again you are just over reacting!  It is too basic. Sasalubungin sa alapaap si Jesus ng mga nabuhay kay Kristo. Ofcorz am referring to reality as of now which is impossible for a man to fly. Chillax! <\/p>\n\n\n\n

gorio20\/20:  <\/strong>biglang lumabas ang god na may tsupa-tsupang halls mint… wow kewl…( napapanahon )

at biglang sinabi na:
(basahin ng ala antonio sanches)

ANNNAAAAAKKKKK kong HOWELLLLLLLL

MAGHUNOS DILI KA ANAAAAKKKKKKKK…

HINDI PA KITA INI-ENABLE AAAAANNNAAAAKKKKKKKKK…

KAYA SHUT THE FOCK UP!!!!!!!

BWAHAHAHAHAH + BWAHAHAHAHAH – BWAHAHAHAHAHA = BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

malamang si mang superlike sumang-ayon dito…paikot-ikot na lang wala namang katapusan eh…bwahahahh<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA:<\/strong>  howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Your given verse that says “which God, Who doesn’t lie” does not even prove that God does lie. It is absolutely opposite of what the bible is saying. It is just you who says He can lie if he chooses to without any proof in the bible. Where as the bible is telling us the exact opposite of what you are saying.

Titus 1:2
“In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began;”

but still you are saying, He can if He chooses to.
Even a couple of versions used “God that doesn’t lie”, MOST OF DIFF. VERSIONS used CANNOT.

-New American Standard Bible (\u00a91995)
“in the hope of eternal life, which God, who cannot lie, promised long ages ago,”

-American King James Version
“In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began;”

-American Standard Version
“in hope of eternal life, which God, who cannot lie, promised before times eternal;”

-Darby Bible Translation
“in the hope of eternal life, which God, who cannot lie, promised before the ages of time,”

-English Revised Version
“in hope of eternal life, which God, who cannot lie, promised before times eternal;”

-Tyndale New Testament
“which truth is in serving God in hope of eternal life, which life God cannot lie, hath promissed before the world began:”

-Webster’s Bible Translation
“In hope of eternal life, which God, who cannot lie, promised before the world began;”

-World English Bible
“in hope of eternal life, which God, who can’t lie, promised before time began;”

Most of scholars who translated the bible used the word CANNOT (and I dont think you are more right than them) and in the other verse IMPOSSIBLE TO LIE becoz that is the essence there, HE HAS NO CAPACITY TO LIE. Impossible, meaning He is INCAPABLE OF DOING LYING. Becoz He is the GOD OF TRUTH. He is perfect. No lies. Just the truth. He cannot be called God of truth if He can lie. Why? Becoz lie is of SATAN, THE DEVIL.

John 8:44
“Kayo’y sa inyong amang diablo, at ang mga nais ng inyong ama ang ibig ninyong gawin. Siya’y isang mamamatay-tao buhat pa nang una, at hindi nananatili sa katotohanan, sapagka’t walang katotohanan sa kaniya. Pagka nagsasalita siya ng kasinungalingan, ay nagsasalita siya ng sa ganang kaniya: sapagka’t siya’y isang sinungaling, at ama nito.”

“Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it. “

And He being in the state of perfection and absolute truth will not change EVER.

James 1:17 
“Ang bawa’t mabuting kaloob at ang bawa’t sakdal na kaloob ay pawang buhat sa itaas,
na bumababa mula sa Ama ng mga ilaw, na walang pagbabago, ni kahit anino man ng pagiiba.”

“Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and comes down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shadow of turning.”

And this is exactly what the other versions tell us, He NEVER, EVER lies becoz He is the God of truth.

-GOD’S WORD\u00ae Translation (\u00a91995)
“My message is based on the confidence of eternal life. God, who NEVER LIES, promised this eternal life before the world began.”

-Bible in basic english
In the hope of eternal life, which was made certain before eternal time, by the word of God who is EVER TRUE;

-Weymouth New Testament
“in hope of the Life of the Ages which God, who is NEVER FALSE to His word, promised before the commencement of the Ages.”

Everything is actually clear. EFS said “As it is unwise to put limits to Him, it is equally unwise to put elasticity to the limits set by God for Himself.”

And it is so good to believe that He is the God of truth, that is perfect and cannot lie. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

One question should settle the issue: Being the perfect God that he is, does God still have freewill? My position is yes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

If you still believe that He can do everything, it is just that He chooses not to do it. 
Then I want you to answer this.

Will it be possible for Him to connive with satan? 

II CORINTHIANS 6:14
“Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?”

“Huwag kayong makipamatok ng kabilan sa mga di nagsisisampalataya: sapagka’t anong pakikisama mayroon ang katuwiran at kalikuan? o anong pakikisama mayroon ang kaliwanagan sa kadiliman?”

Is it possible for him to be an author of confusion? 
I CORINTHIANS 14:33
“For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.”

“Sapagka’t ang Dios ay hindi Dios ng kaguluhan, kundi ng kapayapaan. Gaya sa lahat ng mga iglesia ng mga banal,”

Is it possible for Him to betray the trust of His children? 

I CORINTHIANS 1:9
“God is faithful, by whom ye were called unto the fellowship of his Son Jesus Christ our Lord. 
The verses cited after each question prove that there are many things which are impossible to God. I pray for your
enlightenment.”

“Ang Dios ay tapat, na sa pamamagitan niya ay tinawag kayo sa pakikisama ng kaniyang anak na si Jesucristo na Panginoon natin.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

You know, your line of questioning is no different from the atheist who asked the question I already posted and reiterated by another poster in this forum: “Can God make a stone so heavy he can’t carry it?”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Again you are just over reacting! It is too basic. Sasalubungin sa alapaap si Jesus ng mga nabuhay kay Kristo. Ofcorz am referring to reality as of now which is impossible for a man to fly. Chillax! <\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Man is not yet a finished product. He is still a work in progress.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

MEG<\/strong>: @ howellstamaria

bro ano basic statement of faith mo? <\/p>\n\n\n\n

howellstamaria<\/strong>:<\/strong> Basic statement of faith!?

* The name of the true Church of God built not by any men, but by God himself is “The Church of God in Christ Jesus the Pillar and Ground of Truth. (1 Timothy 3:15) <\/p>\n\n\n\n

 
* Christ is not man, but a god that manifested in flesh. (human body)

* Contribution inside the church in our time must not be thru tithing (10% of your earnings must be given to church) , but it must be VOLUNTEER and no definite or exact amount. 

* GOD CAN’T DO ALL THINGS. (He can’t connive with satan) <\/p>\n\n\n\n


* There is no purgatory. Image\/Idol worship is against God. Use of rosary is against God. 

* Christ the begotten son of god is not Quibuloy. (becoz he claims he is christ) 

* People who are outside the true Church of God
will be judged according to their work and still got the chance of salvation. (unlike in Iglesia ni cristo na labas sa kanilang iglesia ay wala ng kaligtasan.)

* Baptism means, “paghuhugas ng kasalanan” and a child or the young ones don’t need to be baptized yet, since they are still innocent of sins. 

* Ang Iglesia na pumapatay ay hindi sa Dios.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

EMA:<\/strong>  howellstamaria wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Basic statement of faith!?

* People who are outside the true Church of God
will be judged according to their work and still got the chance of salvation. (unlike in Iglesia ni cristo na labas sa kanilang iglesia ay wala ng kaligtasan.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

————————————–<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The above quoted “statement of faith” is based on the belief that this age is the only age of salvation. 

If this be true, then God would be unfair because he will be holding accountable and be punishing people who are deceived and are not given the capacity to knowingly exercise their freedom of choice. 

The bible teaching is that God will first equip a person with the Holy Spirit to enable him to know God and his purpose. It is the person so indwelt with the Holy Spirit who will choose either to follow the lead of the Holy Spirit or just let his “old man”, his old nature govern his thoughts and actions. This is illustrated by the parable of the talents or minas.

Luke 19:12 Therefore He said: \u201cA certain nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom and to return. 13 So he called ten of his servants, delivered to them ten minas, and said to them, \u2018Do business till I come.\u2019 

Jesus is the nobleman who is now in heaven. Those who are drawn to Jesus and given the Holy Spirit are those who then and now comprise the Church of God. They have been cleansed of their past sins and were given the “minas” with which to develop God’s image of love. They were and are instructed to “Do business till” Jesus comes. It is only those who have been given the Holy Spirit who are being judged in their lifetime of “doing business”, of developing the image or character of God till Jesus’ return. The world at large is not yet being judged. 

At Christ’s return, Jesus will make those who have become part of the Church account how they have been doing or not doing with the Holy Spirit (minas) they have been entrusted with.

Luke 19:15 \u201cAnd so it was that when he returned, having received the kingdom, he then commanded these servants, to whom he had given the money, to be called to him, that he might know how much every man had gained by trading.

Those not called to be part of the COG in this age are not being judged. Judgment begins with those only of the “house” or Church of God.

1 Peter 4:17 For the time has come for judgment to begin at the house of God…

The verdict will be: those who followed the lead of the Holy Spirit in order to overcome will be judged worthy to become part of Jesus’ team which will govern this earth at his return. 

Luke 19:16 Then came the first, saying, \u2018Master, your mina has earned ten minas.\u2019 17 And he said to him, \u2018Well done, good servant; because you were faithful in a very little, have authority over ten cities.\u2019 18 And the second came, saying, \u2018Master, your mina has earned five minas.\u2019 19 Likewise he said to him, \u2018You also be over five cities.\u2019 

The person who did not do anything with the gift of the Holy Spirit in him is judged to have not submitted to God’s reign over him. Despite the lead of the Holy Spirit in him to do God’s will, he trod the easier way of this world and failed to develop God’s image of love in him. He just kept the power of the Holy Spirit unused, “put away in a handkerchief”.

Luke 19:20 \u201cThen another came, saying, \u2018Master, here is your mina, which I have kept put away in a handkerchief.

He made his choice knowingly. He, as well as the others, chose to not make God to reign over them. And God would not force them. God will just simply terminate their existence forever.

Luke 19:24 \u201cAnd he said to those who stood by, \u2018Take the mina from him, and give it to him who has ten minas.\u2019 25 (But they said to him, \u2018Master, he has ten minas.\u2019) 26 \u2018For I say to you, that to everyone who has will be given; and from him who does not have, even what he has will be taken away from him. 27 But bring here those enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, and slay them before me.\u2019\u201d

Only those who have been given the Holy Spirit in this age will be judged as to who will have eternal life or who will be meted the eternal death. That death which is irreversible. 

Those in this age who have since died and those who will still die without being drawn to Christ and without receiving the Holy Spirit will have their chance during the great white throne judgment period to be so given in order to knowingly choose between life and death.

Revelation 20:11 Then I saw a great white throne and Him who sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away. And there was found no place for them. 12 And I saw the dead, small and great, standing before God, and books (Greek is “biblios”, the bible) were opened…13 The sea gave up the dead who were in it, and Death and Hades delivered up the dead who were in them. And they were judged, each one according to his works. 

“books were opened” to the understanding of those who will be reading the biblios or bible. And these will be open to their understanding because they will be given the capacity to understand by the Holy Spirit which will be given them. It is only after they are made to understand and to knowingly make a choice through their works when they will be judged. Those who will submit to God’s reign over them as shown in their works of overcoming their selves, their names will not be erased from the Book of Life.

Revelation 20:…12 And another book was opened, which is the Book of Life. And the dead were judged according to their works, by the things which were written in the books. 

Those who, like the unfruitful servant in the parable of the minas, will knowingly choose to not make God to reign over them will be meted the eternal death. Their names will be erased from the Book of Life.

Revelation 20:15 And anyone not found written in the Book of Life was cast into the lake of fire.
The belief of everlasting torment in a hellfire is a lie. To be so in such a lake is not death. The person is still alive and this is not that which the bible teaches. The opposite of eternal life is to perish (John 3:16).<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

http:\/\/forum.philboxing.com\/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=185726 Why build the Church? The answer to the question is so that Christ will be revealed to those whom God will draw to Jesus and for them to really know who he and what his purpose is. This answer is shown in Matthew 16:13-20 where in verse 18 Jesus declared that he will build…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_genesis_hide_title":false,"_genesis_hide_breadcrumbs":false,"_genesis_hide_singular_image":false,"_genesis_hide_footer_widgets":false,"_genesis_custom_body_class":"","_genesis_custom_post_class":"","_genesis_layout":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/friendshipwaylife.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/268"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/friendshipwaylife.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/friendshipwaylife.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/friendshipwaylife.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/friendshipwaylife.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=268"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/friendshipwaylife.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/268\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/friendshipwaylife.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=268"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/friendshipwaylife.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=268"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/friendshipwaylife.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=268"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}