Welcome to WordPress.com. This is your first post. Edit or delete it and start blogging!
Hi, this is a comment.To delete a comment, just log in, and view the posts’ comments, there you will have the option to edit or delete them.
Before I give you my reply I humble myself to introduce my name. I am Odan Matig-a who is also a commenter together with Winnie in esoriano blog.
truthhuntsman at Winnie:
“You wrote earlier and I quote: “Jerico, your preacher is
blatant liar; he deliberately cut and splices statement to
make a story. What kind of preacher is he? He said that I made
a comment that a preacher sent by God should have had written
//The word “blatant” used by Winnie means; without shame. In
my case he is not but he (Eli S.) is an incorrigible liar. Why
I say that? Because Eli S. tried to misquote my opinion when I
told a certain ADD follower like this; ““Why? Is your faith with your Bro. Eli? The Catholics during the Roman Empire died for their faith in Christ and not for the apostles.”
When I corrected his statement he insisted that he quoted me correctly!
Mr. Eli S. did not only cut and splice my opinion but he
mangled the whole idea by asking Winnie like this; “is dying
for the apostles a wrong reason?” My opinion is; “Why? Is your
faith with your Bro. Eli? The Catholics during the Roman
Empire died for their faith in Christ and not for the
“Granting for the sake of argument that it wasn’t you but your
fellow Catholic who said that a preacher sent by God should
have had written a book, the mere fact that you were trying
hard to defend her position (as shown above) in effect made
you equally liable for gross ignorance of the scripture.”
//Winnie is correct! I am the one who challenged Eli S. that
if he is truly a man sent by God who has received revelation
then he should write it in a form of a book. If that is the case, it can be said that Joseph Smith and Muhammad are better religious leaders than Eli S. because their revelations from
God are written in a book. While Eli S. is using the bible which is the book of the Catholic Church. The theology in the bible is written for the catholics.//
truthhuntsman at Winnie:
“You wrote and I quote: “Bro Eli said that there is no word,
“pope” mentioned in the Bible, then he goes on to say that the
word pope means “father”. Of course this time he is 50%
correct, he contradicted himself, saying that there is no word
pope/papa/father in the Bible. Surely the Bible contains
thousands of word, “father”, hence clearly the word pope is in
the Bible”. – End of quote.”
//I think it’s you who did not understand what Winnie meant in
the quote above. Eli S. said that; “there is no word pope in
the bible”. Eli S. is trying to deceive his followers by his
refusal to say that there are words pope in the bible. The
NT is written originally in greek and the word father is in
the bible therefore the word pope also is in the bible because
it simply means pappa which is greek.//
“Again your behavioral Catholicism is in the works here with
the above “nice try” at deception, distortion of facts by way
of putting words into Bro. Eli’s mouth so to speak. Never did
he say that pope means father, instead, what he said was: The
word “pope” according to Catholic authorities means, “Father”.
You can find that in this reference: New Advent (deleted)
Moreover, he did not say that the word father is not found in
the bible! For the sake of the readers whom you are trying to
mislead and deceive, hereunder is the text of Bro. Eli’s
discussion of the topic which you @Winnie is trying to
//Okay… it’s my turn say; “granting without admitting” that
Eli S. is not deceiving his followers that the word pope is
only “according to Catholic authorities” means “Father”. If
so; what does pope mean according to you and also to Mr. Eli
Soriano? Please answer my question!//
Anti-catholic teaching of Eli S. followed by truthhuntsman:
“THE OFFICE AND PERSON OF THE POPE, LEADER OF THE CATHOLIC
CHURCH, IS NOT BIBLICAL!”
//Mr. Eli Soriano is wrong! The office and person of the pope
is biblical. Jesus Christ in Matthew 16:18-19 handed the keys
to St. Peter. Keys in ancient Judaism means authority or an
office. Caiaphas was the high priest of the temple in Jerusalem… therefore he is the holder of the keys.
In christianity Jesus gave the keys to St Peter which is the office or authority as a high priest of the church.//
More anti-catholic teaching by Eli S.:
“The word “pope” according to Catholic authorities means,
Correct! According to ADD what does pope mean? Please answer!
truthhuntsman quoted Eli S.:
“Although Catholic authorities say that Peter was the first
pope, no records in history, in archaeology or in the Bible
will prove that Peter was once a pope! The apostles, including
Peter were prohibited by the Lord Jesus Christ to use the
title “father” or “teacher”.”
//You are trapped into the lies of Eli Soriano. There are
plenty of records in history that St. Peter was once the pope
in Rome, in archaeology or in the bible.
In history the early christian fathers attested in their
writings that St. Peter was the first pope. In history there
is no other credible records nearest to the bible except the
writings of the early christians. If you have records in history that will refute the early christians writings… then show me!
In Archaeology you can dig up the burial place of St. Peter in
the Vatican catacomb.
In the bible if you believed that St. Peter was not appointed
by Christ then I am going to throw this question to you. And please answer!
Who is the leader of the apostles according to the bible?//
MATTHEW 23:8-9 (KJV)
“But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even
Christ; and all ye are brethren. And call no man your father
upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven”.”
Matthew 23:8 is anti Judaism. Rabbi is a jewish teacher. Jesus Christ didn’t want his followers to learn from the jewish teachers in the synagogue…. and verse 9 is anti paganism because pagan worshippers in Israel during Jesus times called their god “el” the father of mankind.
Therefore calling the pagan god father is prohited but calling
“father” a spiritual father is not prohibited in the bible. In
Luke 16:24 the rich man called Abraham father.
“And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and
send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water,
and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.”
You see! This rich man is in hell calling for Father Abraham.
He is a man and he is called father!
“Arguments to the contrary based on illogical reasoning and
distorted personal opinions are passed off as truth by the
Catholics but the final authority is the word of God, which
never said that there has been such an office in the true
//If you think my arguments are based on illogical premises
then try to refute it. Your counter arguments are welcome!//
“Careful perusal of the above discussion clearly exposed your
deception and lies @Winnie, I’m very sorry for you! Do you
consider yourself a Christian? Why can’t you not accept and
observe Christian doctrine in MATTHEW 23:8-9?”
//Of course! We catholics are more christian than any member of the ADD religious organization. You see we believe in Jesus as the second person in the Blessed Trinity and we believe the Holy Spirit while your belief is heretical. Your teacher in the person of Mr. Eli soriano is teaching a another Christ like the Christ of the gnostics. Your version of a Christ can be read in the gospel of Judas. You want proof from me?//
“Ah, I see, you’re a Catholic with a Jewish tendency by pitting Isaiah 22:20-21 against MATTHEW 23:8-9! The rest of your comments are irrelevant, misleading and without probative value!”- End of quote.”
//We catholics are not pitting Isaiah 22:20-21 and Matthew 23:8-9. You are like comparing apples and oranges. Matthew 23:8-9 has a different interpretation. My explanation above tells you that verse 8 is anti Judaism and verse 9 is anti paganism. Isaiah 22:20-21 has a different theological interpretation. Let’s read;
“20 And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will call my servant Eliacim the son of Helcias, 21 and I will clothe him with your robe, and will strengthen him with your girdle, and will give your power into his hand: and he shall be as a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and to the house of Juda. 22 And I will lay the key of the house of David upon his shoulder: and he shall open, and none shall shut: and he shall shut, and none shall open.”
This is a prophecy of the coming of a leader… a high priest. This is referred to Christ. Note that he is to be a “father” to the people of Jerusalem. In verse 21 it is talking of clothing Eliacim. This is referred to a priestly clothing. Please note also of the “key” in verse 22. But when he rose up to heaven the key was handed over to St. Peter. The key is the papal [father] office. Did you get the point?//
“Now, going back to this latest “comment brouhaha” of yours
(where you are trying to downgrade the significance of this
blog which you termed as non-doctrinal),”
//I believe also that this esoriano blog is non-doctrinal because mostly it deals of attacking the Catholic Church. And I have not read statement by Mr. Eli Soriano declaring his doctrine in the blog. If it is doctrinal then show me the doctrine of ADD!//
“I would say that you really are in a continuing denial mode on the biblical doctrine abundantly mentioned by Bro. Eli here…”
//If I’m not mistaken Mr. Eli S. wrote about the church in the wilderness which is; as he asserted the original church in the bible established by God before there was a church established by Jesus Christ in Matthew 16:18. Is this not contradictory doctrine?//
“while you even have the gall to reiterate the glaringly “massaged statement” of yours as follows:
“Let me state again my take on this. Yes Odan Matig-a is right
and correct when he said the the early Christians died for the
FAITH in Christ and not (primarily) for the apostles or their
FAITH to any of the apostles.””
//Winnie is correct again! I also said that; “the early Christians died for the FAITH in Christ and not (primarily) for the apostles or their FAITH to any of the apostles”…. when I argued with Mr. Eli Soriano.//
“Note that the above statement of yours is not exactly what
Odan Matig-as, your fellow Catholic apologist has said as
follows: “The Catholics during the Roman Empire died for their
faith in Christ and not for the apostles.” See the difference?”
//You are quoting me out of context! You mis-quoted me just like your teacher. The correct quote is this; “Why? Is your faith with your Bro. Eli? The Catholics during the Roman Empire died for their faith in Christ and not for the apostles.” I asked this to a certain chevron in the blog. Did you see also the difference?//
“The difference not only in form but in substance as well was
clearly explained by Bro. Eli in this article complete with
biblical references if you would only care to read and
understand very carefully.”
//You are correct! The substance is gone because I was asking chevron why he has too much faith in his Bro. Eli. Because if his faith is more on Mr. Eli S. then he is practicing cultism. But Mr. Eli S. tried to evade this issue. He wanted the issue to be diverted to the apostles. Get my point again!//
very clear information, thanks be to God, we have this to depend the aggrieve parties.
Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:
You are commenting using your WordPress.com account.
( Log Out /
You are commenting using your Google+ account.
( Log Out /
You are commenting using your Twitter account.
( Log Out /
You are commenting using your Facebook account.
( Log Out /
Connecting to %s
Notify me of new comments via email.