haba ng backread ko, kasi gusto malaman sagot sa tanong ni c4u. di naman sinasagot. dinaanan sa walang IQ![]()
haba ng backread ko, kasi gusto malaman sagot sa tanong ni c4u. di naman sinasagot. dinaanan sa walang IQ![]()
thread title: Iglesia ni Cristo Refused Shelter
huwag na tayong lumayo, dito pa lang sa issue na ito e bagsak na si Manalo at ang mga alipores nito. ABS-CBN na mismo ang nagreport, hindi na blogsite at FB. Ito ba ang "pagmamahal" ng relihiyon ninyo? 11 pamilya lang ang na-accomodate? regardless of kahit ano pa ang relihiyon nung 11 families na yan, worst is kung pure iglesia nga sila, nasaan na yung ibang members? kung mahal nila ang mga alipores nila sana beforehand e "inakay" na nila sa loob ng kapilya para maging safe.
now, para naman sa OT natin:
sabi ng friend ko (since high school):
"meron syempre 10% (standard/minimum), pero hindi naman nila alam yung sahod ko talaga"
sabi ni hipag (nakapag-asawa ng INC, galing katoliko):
"meron kami offering, 10%"
sabi ni officemate (tiwalag, 5 years ago):
"oo naman, noong nag-aaral pa lang ako, sa allowance (sa school) namin ang basehan"
"kapag absent ka, pupuntahan ka sa bahay nyo, parang guidance center ng school ang dating, tatanungin pa kung bakit ka absent o di naka-samba"
yan mga pahayag ng mga kaibigan ko, huwag mo sabihing "hearsay" o "sabi-sabi" lang dahil may tiwala ako sa mga yan at wala kang karapatang sabihang sinungaling sila.
puro ka link ng mga babasahin. tama sila, hindi mo direktang masagot ang mga simpleng tanong. yung pagkain lang ng dinuguan e napaka-hipokrito, bawal daw, pero tignan mo yung mga alipores ni manalo, nasa inuman at xmas party. letse.
o para sa may mga utak na INC, pakisagot:
1. totoo ba yung 10% na mandatory offerings sa relihiyon ninyo?
[ ] YES [ ] NO
2. INC lang ba ang maliligtas?
[ ] YES [ ] NO
3. si Manalo ba ang huling sugo? nasa Bible ba ito?
[ ] YES [ ] NO
4. bawal ba ang "dinuguan" na kainin ninyo?
[ ] YES [ ] NO
5. matitiwalag ka ba kung ikaw ay umiinom ng alak, sumasali sa mga kasiyahan, nakikipag-diwang ng pasko?
[ ] YES [ ] NO
6. (essay) paano ninyo nasabing kayo lamang ang maliligtas gayung nakasaad naman sa Bible na gamit ninyo na walang relihiyon ang makakapagligtas sa sangkatauhan?
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ ____________________
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ ____________________
_____________________________________ (max of 50 words)
![]()
Ganito lang yan mga sirs eh:
1 John 5:7: "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one."
![]()
Eh totoo naman eh. Mukha siyang nauntog aka praning lang na nilalang at nagsabi na "ako ang huling sugo ng Diyos dito sa lupa"
Dahil lang sa pag-interpret niya ng bible, ayan ang nangyari.
FTW that. At nang dahil sa kanya, nagkagulo ang landscape ng Philippine Christianity dito sa atin
Puro ka kasinungalingan, nakaka baba ng IQ yang post mo.
Di lang 10% no. Dalawang beses kaya kami mag samba sa isang lingo, at bawat pag samba may offering. Di lang dyan natapos ang offering marami pa, at yung thanks giving na offering ang pinaka malaki dahil isang taong ipon namin yan para kay Manalo. Kaya mali ang 10% na pinag pipilitan mo, higit pa sa 10% kamo. God loves a cheerful giver sabi ni ministro kaya bigay lang kami ng bigay.
Ang mamahal pa kaya ng mga bahay sambahan namin kaya ubod ng tibay at ang dami naming naiipatayo sa isang taon dahil marami talaga kaming pera.![]()
^ anak ng tokwa. Grabe naman yung sa allowance. Imagine ko lang ang isang tatay na Tulad ko na nagpapaaral ng anak. Eh kung ang sinasahod ko na nakaltasan na ng withholding tax, Sss, pag-ibig, philhealth eh kelangan ko pa magbigay ng 10% sa iglesia. Eh Nakuha na nga yung ikapu bakit pa kahit allowance ng anak ko eh kakaltasan? Parang double taxation on the same object! Sana yung mga kapatid natin INC sa kongreso o yung mga bata ng inc sa kongreso ay magpasa ng batas na gawing tax deductible yan handog na 10%. Lumiit man lang yun tax ko at medyo magkaron ng onti pang take home. Pag ganyan mangyare eh makiki anib narin siguro ako. Hehehe
The text says there are three that testify, indicating the subject matter of the verse concerns a united witness between these three and there is no reason one should suppose it would imply anything else. 1 John 5:7 literally says, "and these three are one." The very next verse, concerning the Spirit and the water and the blood, literally says, "the three are unto the one" meaning these too have a common and united testimony. To be consistent, the Trinitarian advocate of 1 John 5:7 should also then conclude these three, the water, the Spirit, and the blood, are also a Trinity of one being. It is quite reckless to interpret this text as declaring the Father, Word and Holy Spirit are one God when all the verse says is the three are a united witness, one testimony. The oneness in question is a oneness of purpose and function, not a oneness of identity or ontology and substance of being. In other words, the three, the Father, the Word, and the Spirit are in one united agreement concerning their witness/testimony.
In a similar sense, Jesus prayed for this same unity of oneness between himself the Father and the church. We would not therefore assume these three are "God."
I do not pray for these only, but also for those who believe in me through their word, that they may all be one, just as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that you have sent me. The glory which thou hast given me I have given to them, that they may be one just as we are one, I in them and you in me, that they may become perfectly one. (John 17:20-23).
As we can see, Jesus prayed that he and the Father and all the disciples would be one. Shall we then suppose all these are God? Of course not. And there is not reason to do so with this passage either. Both of these passages, John 17:20-23 and 1 John 5:7, are referring to function, not substance of being. This passage simply does not suggest a Triune God even if it was valid. It simply says that there are three who testify and these three are one. It also says the Spirit, water, and blood are one in the same sense. Neither of the two groups of three are to be understood one other thing but as one unified testimony.
Haba-haba ng sagot ni Mile2 pero wala akong naiintindihan sa sagot niya. Parang copy paste yun sagot![]()
Ang logic at paniwala ng INC ang Ama ay ang tunay na Diyos therefore wala ng pwede pang ibang maging Diyos.