Holy Spirit Presence and Supernatural Powers

By Eusebio Tanicala

The Holy Spirit is deity; the Holy Spirit is a distinct person from the Father and from Christ. Being a divine Person, the Holy Spirit, therefore, is infinite, boundary less, boundless, limitless in presence. The HS is omnipresent or present everywhere. He is inside or within the universe, within our galaxy and within our human personhood. At the same time, the HS is outside the universe, beyond the farthest stars. He is both transcendent and immanent. He is outside and yet inside.

Among Churches of Christ, the belief is that there are different levels of Holy Spirit powers which are (a) Full Measure which was present in our Lord Jesus Christ during His personal ministry on earth; (b) Baptismal Measure which was given by Christ to the apostles; (c) Miraculous Measure which was given to some groups upon whom the apostles laid their hands on; and (d) Ordinary Measure which is given to every true believer. The Ordinary Measure is also called the “indwelling” or special presence of the Holy Spirit in the Christian life as an earnest of eternal life and to assist him in godly living. See Romans 8:9, 11; 1 Cor. 3:16.

Does presence or dwelling automatically turn on miraculous and supernatural powers in the place or in the person? No. We might illustrate it this way: the presence or indwelling of a billionaire in a hotel does not automatically turn the hotel room into a magical mill that produces money. The billionaire has to will the release of his money as he sees the need and as he loves to spread out favors. The Holy Spirit dispensed miraculous gifts in the first century as He saw it fit. Churches of Christ submits 1 Cor. 11:8-11 to support the belief that the miraculous and supernatural gifts of the Holy Spirit ended when the “complete” had arrived which is the revelation and full understanding of the gospel message by the universal church.

Ephesians 4:11-16; Romans 12:3-8 and 1 Cor. 12:12-31 tell us all that various levels of power and various types of gifts were distributed by the Holy Spirit in the first century. Distribution of spiritual gifts is willed by the Holy Spirit. Gifting of talents to individuals is willed by the Holy Spirit. Gifts of the Holy Spirit are also governed by the capacity and/or receptivity of the requesting individual.

The Holy Spirit is a person who wills and has the power to measure what He wants to release. If man has the power to measure the amount of electricity or light by releasing energy in 5 or 10 or 25 or 50 or 500 watts, the Holy Spirit is more powerful.

We could also think of localization and intensification of Holy Spirit power. While God is everywhere, God’s power and glory don’t explode in the same degree and same intensity in all places. Let’s cite various historical periods. During the Exodus, God was everywhere, but His power and providence was localized and intensified among the Israelites at the foot of Mt. Sinai. Such power and providence were not replicated in Egypt, Syria, Mesopotamia, China or India.
When God appeared to Moses or gave a vision to King Solomon or to Isaiah or Daniel such were not replicated in places like Egypt, Syria, Mesopotamia, China or India.

Our conclusion on this matter is this: Belief in the Holy Spirit’s presence or indwelling in the temple of Solomon or in a prophet of the Old Testament or in the Christian in the first century or a disciple in the 21st century doesn’t demand automatic miraculous powers manifesting in those places and persons. #

AMY CAHULOGAN, CUM LAUDE

Amy Bernardo Cahulogan, daughter of Apolinario & Beth Cahulogan, graduated cum laude last October. She finished her Bachelor of Science in Education, major in General Science, at the Saint Louis University in Baguio City. She enjoyed full SM scholarship since her first year in college. Congratulations!

Leadership training in Davao del Sur

Brother Joel Carpio reports that a seminar on church leadership was recently conducted in Jose Abad Santos, Davao del Sur.

Attributes & Characteristics of Deity

By Eusebio Tanicala

(Note: This is another article that could add knowledge about the Holy Trinity which will in turn increase understanding about Tritheism and Unitarianist. Please don’t teach wrong arguments to our young preachers. These young preachers could be discouraged once they are confronted with the weakness of arguments they are initially taught. This is series #5).

Our ability to explain and demonstrate the Trinity of the Godhead is not objection-proof. But with some explanations to start with give basis for our belief. Belief in the Trinity has scriptural basis. It has logic in it.

The attributes and characteristics listed below could serve to measure persons who belong to the Godhead.

A. The true God is called God
1. Father – John 20:17; etc. Accepted fact,
2. Son – Heb. 1:8; Rom 9:5; Titus 2:13; Isa. 9:6; 1 John 5:20; John 1:1-3; John 20:28; Matt. 4:7
3. Holy Spirit – Acts 5:3-4
B. The true God is called Yahweh. The Old Testament books applied this name to the true God only.
1. Father – Deut. 6:3; etc. Accepted fact.
2. Son – Isaiah 40:3 cf. Matt. 3:3 & Luke 3:4-6
3. Holy Spirit – Micah 3:8 cf. Romans 15:19; John 3:34

C. The true God is Omnipotent (Boundless power)
1. Father – 2 Cor. 6:18; Rev. 21:22; Jer. 32:18, etc. Accepted
2. Son – John 5:19; John 13:3; Matt. 28:18; Rev. 1:7-8 cf. 17-18; Isa. 9:6
3. Holy Spirit – Micah 3:8; Rom 15:19; John 3:34

D. The true God is Omniscient (Boundless knowledge)
1. Father – Job 24:1; Acts 1:7; etc. Accepted fact.
2. Son – John 5:19-20; Jn 8:19; Jn. 13:3; Jn 16:15,30; Jn 18:4; Jn 21:17; Col. 2:2-3; 2:25; :35; Mtt. 9:4
3. Holy Spirit –1 Cor. 2:10-11

E. The true God is Omnipresent (Boundless presence)
1. Father – Jer. 23:23-24; etc Accepted fact.
2. Son – Matt. 18:20; Matt. 26:29; Matt. 28:20; 1 Cor. 10:16-17
3. Holy Spirit – Psalm 139:7-13; 1 Cor. 6:19

F. The true God is Eternal (Self-existing)
1. Father – Psalm 90:1-2; Deut. 33:27; etc. Accepted fact.
2. Son – Isaiah 9:6; 48:16; John 1:1; Heb. 1:12; Micah 5:2
3. Holy Spirit – Hebrew 9:14

G. The true God is Source of Spiritual & Physical Life
1. Father – John 5:26; Genesis 2:7; etc. Accepted fact.
2. Son – John 1:4; Jn 5:21; Jn 10:28; Jn 11:25-26; Jn 14:6; 1 John 1:1-3;
3. Holy Spirit – Isaiah 44:34; John 3:5

H. The true God Doesn’t Change in Essence
1. Father – James 1:17; etc. Accepted fact.
2. Son – Hebew 13:8; Rev. 1:4, 8, 17
3. Holy Spirit – Hebrew 9:14

I. The true God Is Worthy of Worship
1. Father – John 4:21, 24; etc. Accepted fact.
2. Son – Matt. 2:11; John 5:23; Phil. 2:9-10
3. Holy Spirit – Romans 2:9; 7:6; 8:26; Phil. 3:3; Jude 20

J. The true God Is Creator of all Invisible & Visible Beings
1. Father – Genesis 1:1; etc. Accepted
2. Son – John 1:3; Colossians 1:16-17; Heb. 1:8; 1 Cor. 8:6
3. Holy Spirit – Genesis 1:3; Job 26:13; Job 33:4; Psalm 104:30

K. The true God Is Savior of Mankind from Spiritual Death
1. Father – 1 Tim 4:10; etc. Accepted fact.
2. Son – Matt. 1:21; 1 Tim. 1:15; etc.
3. Holy Spirit – Ephesiasn 1:13-14; 2 Cor. 1:22

L. The true God Existed Before the Genesis 1:1 Creation
1. Father & Holy Spirit – Accepted fact.
2. Son: Was a spirit persona before creation. See the ff: Col. 1:16-17; John 1:3; Heb. 1:8; John  1:10-11; 17:5; Psalm 102:25-27.

Christ was a spirit persona before His becoming flesh sometimes appearing in material form as proven by the following passages: Genesis 18-19 the Yahweh who appeared as man is evidently the Second Person because the Father/God in full glory could not be seen; 1 Cor. 10:4 combined with Exodus 17:6 & Num. 20:11 prove that Christ was active and became a Rock. John 1:15, 30 and John 3:31 says that Christ had been ascending to heaven before He descended to become flesh. John 3:32; 5:19-20; 6:46, 48; John 8:38; 12:44-45 and 14:31 declare that Christ saw and heard heavenly things before He came down to earth and He testified about many of these things when he was on earth. Only when we accept that He was a spirit persona before his incarnation could these things be possible.

*Christ Existed as a spirit persona before the creation of the world in Genesis 1:1. This section will prove that Christ is not a mere human being given extra ordinary powers. When we could accept that Christ had a spirit persona before his becoming man, then we should accept that He is not a mere human being. And during the period of His incarnation from 1 to 33 A.D. He had two natures in His one persona: Divine and Human.

M. Yahweh Can Become What He Wants to Become
1. Father – He can manifest Himself to mankind. Accepted fact.
2. Holy Spirit – Could you tell yourself what form the Spirit worked on the material world in Genesis 1:3? He manifested Himself in the form of a Dove when Christ was baptized; form of cloven tongues of fire when He descended on the Apostles in the Day of Pentecost in Acts 2 .
3. Son – 1 Cor. 10:4; Exo. 17:6 & Num. 20:11 declare that Christ became a rock. I believe that it is more logical to say that Christ is the Yahweh that appeared as man in Gen. 18-19 than assigning this to the Father. He could be the Angel of Yahweh (if you accept that the general meaning of the term aggelos is messenger) in Judges chapters 6 and 13 there was fear of dying for having come “face to face” with the spirit being. This fear and reverence is not found when the Angel Gabriel appeared to the Virgin Mary in Luke 1. These manifestations were felt by the sense of seeing so it must have been physical in form.

* And if Satan the Devil could become a snake of flesh and bones when he tempted Adam and Eve, and if Satan could become an angel of light, it should be logical that Christ could become man.

In the above major attributes and characteristics, the three persons in the Godhead are united, congruent, intersecting, harmonious, same. The term applied to that perfect unity is the word “one.” If there be a higher level of unity and harmony among the three persons of Deity, I am willing to listen and consider any well documented evidence.

In the NKJV the following verses have the term “one” which the The Great Book, the New Testament in Plain English render “united.” Please check up the following: John 10:30, “united;” John 17:11, “united;” 22, “united;” 23, “united;” Acts 4:32, “shared everything;” Acts 5:12, “same purpose;” Romans 15:5, “agree with one another;” 6, “one voice, altogether;” 1 Cor. 1:10, “all of you must agree, no divisions among you;” 1 Cor. 3:8, “work together;” 1 Cor. 12:12, “body is a unit;” Ephesians 4:3, “Keep the Spirit’s unity.” #

Tolerated but not Permitted?

By Eusebio Tanicala

Some preachers use the case of divorce based on the text of Matt. 19:1-10 as parallel to the issue of instrumental music in worship. Their idea is that God wanted a “till death do couples part” marriage which was meant for Adam and Eve. But the Israelites, these preachers claim, forced Moses to insert into the Law a decree on divorce. The conclusion is “God reluctantly tolerated divorce from the days of Moses until the coming of the New Covenant.” In like manner, it is claimed by some, that there was no instrumental music from Adam to the days of King David, that King David “invented and introduced” instruments of music which God reluctantly tolerated, but in the New Covenant it is no longer allowed, the claim goes.

Presumptions on the two cases are flawed, hence the parallelism is wrong. We’ll show why.

Their line of argument about divorce based on Matt. 19:1-10 includes the following:

1. A God-arranged or ideal marriage as in the case of Adam and Eve was a “till death do the couple part.”
2. Moses, on his own discretion being the leader of Israel, introduced divorce due to the insistence and hardness of heart on the part of Israel.
3. God was not pleased with the divorce decree, He didn’t permit it but merely tolerated its practice.
4. But now in the NT, divorce is prohibited in the church.
5. The above line of argument is carried over on to the case of instrumental music in worship as follows:

• A God-arranged or ideal worship was one without mechanical instrument from the time of Adam and Eve.
• King David, on his own discretion being the leader of Israel, invented and introduced instruments of music.
• God was not pleased with instruments of music, He didn’t permit them but merely tolerated their use.
• But now in the NT, instrument of music is prohibited in the church.

Let’s analyze the case of divorce decree found in Deuteronomy and the instruments of music of King David.

Firstly, the ideal husband-wife perfect relationship was defined by God in Genesis 2:26, but the ideal worship was not defined in Genesis.

Secondly, it is not true that it was Moses’ own private discretion that the divorce decree was inserted into the Law. All of the statutes and judgments in the book of Deuteronomy were inspired by Yahweh God. Please see Deut. 5:1; 6:1; 7:12; 8:6; 10:12; 11:1; 12:1; 28:1 & 15; 29:1. The provision on divorce is found in Deut. 22:19-29 and Deut. 24:1-4. All of Deuteronomy is God’s law. The Law of Moses is God’s Law.

Thirdly, at the time of Christ on earth, there were two views about the divorce in Deut. 24:1-4: (a) the School of Hillel which claimed that a man could divorce his wife for any cause, and (b) the School of Shammai which claimed that a man could divorce his wife only on the ground of sexual sin.

Jesus Christ repeated the interpretation of Shammai. The pronouncement of Christ in Matt. 19 means that divorce on the ground of adultery was allowed/permitted to give justice to the innocent party. NKJV on Matt. 19 uses “permitted” while other versions like RSV, Contemporary English Version, Easy-to-Read Version, English Study Bible, The Simple Enlgish Bible, Rick Berry’s Greek-Interlinear render it “allowed you to divorce your wives.”

The term “suffer” means to allow as in the baptism of Jesus by John the Baptist. It is different from the term “longsuffering.” So the claim that “divorce was not allowed” is not based on scriptures.

Fourthly it is not true that King David invented and introduced for the first time instruments of music. David became king of Israel in 1010 B.C. (See 2 Samuel 2), but thousands of years before David was born we read in Genesis 4:21 that Jubal and his sons made and played the harp and flute. Also Yahweh commanded the Hebrew priests, long before David was born, to make trumpets for use in religious services. Please see Num. 29:1; Lev. 23:24 & 25:9.

About a thousand years after Moses died, Yahweh commanded King David to design and manufacture instruments for the tabernacle choir. This command given to King David was coursed thro the palace prophets Gad and Nathan. Please refer to 2 Chron. 29:25. We also love to cite 2 Samuel 23:2 to prove King David’s inspired instructions for Israel. Furthermore, the word “invent” (chashab in Hebrew) in Amos 6:5 means “to think, to devise, or to design” (Young’s Analytical Concordance to the Bible, page 519). It doesn’t mean to bring into existence and use for the first time. It is also a fact that the school of the prophets before Saul became king of Israel was using musical instruments in accompanying their prophesying. See. 1 Samuel 10:5-16. It is clear that instruments of music were used in religious activities prior to David becoming king.

While the use of instrument of music in worship was commanded in the OT on one hand, there is no authority for its use in the NT on the other hand. No command, no inference/implication, no symbolism whatsoever is given in the NT that authorizes instrumental music. The strongest argument appealed to by those who use instruments of music in the worship of God is “Silence of the NT scriptures permits freedom.” But his hermeneutical axiom is dangerous. Worship of God will be governed by the desires and devises of humans and not the instructions of a Majestic, Fearsome, Awesome God and King of the Universe.

The above comparison and contrast considered, I suggest that the issue on divorce be not viewed as a parallel to the case of musical instruments in worship. It is a weak argument. It is a wrong argument. Weak and wrong arguments encourage instrument users to continue on their unauthorized practice.

Please allow me to quote Jack P. Lewis’ advice about using Amos 6:5 in arguing against musical instrument in worship: “How to harmonize the spirit of these two passages, one in Amos and one in 2 Chronicles, perplexed me. As I studied the prophets more, I became conscious that proof-texting is not a proper way to settle the meaning of a passage of Scripture. The use we were making then of Amos 6:5 had done just that…This old proof passage should no longer be cited as a part of the argument about worship. It has no convincing power.”(The Question of Instrumental Music in Worship, TRUTH FOR TODAY, March 2008, page 4).

You may submit to us your comments about this article

New congregation launched in Bokod, Benguet; saints hold medical mission for residents

We thank the Midtown Church of Christ for sending us this wonderful report about on-going efforts to introduce the Word of God in Bokod, Benguet. This report was sent by Jun Reyes.  A slide show is also included .  Please continue to pray for the saints in that area.  Congratulations !

_____

Hello everybody,

Last Nov. 18 & 19, 2008, Midtown COC thru Mission Outreach Ministry (M.O.M.), Body & Soul (chaired by Dr. Sam Cariaga), WBS and Bokod local members hosted a Free Medical-Dental Mission at the Bokod Barangay Plaza. 900+, almost a thousand local residents of Bokod were treated & seen during the 2 day venture.

Volunteers came as far as Butuan City thru Dr. Sam Cariaga, local health workers, SLU nursing students, WBS & Centerpoint COC, Rabon COC in the persons of Edmund & Elaine Bacani and Solomon De Vera, Doctors and Dentists from Baguio, and Midtown family members of course, who really pushed their servant hood attitude even before the birth of Bokod COC over 2 weeks ago. Special mention to Bro. Jojo & Janet Ramos, family & relatives who has truly opened a door for the Gospel to be spread there. The Velasco compound (Jojo’s ancestral home) so far has hosted the on going young church and Saturday Gospel Meetings, not to mention the free Board and Lodging venue of members and visitors all day, all night.

The two day mission at Bokod hopefully will yield more people to know the lord. Thanks to Mayor Mauricio Makay of Bokod and the local government who were very warm in letting us hold a medical mission with free lunch, two days in a row to the residents who came near and far. A first to all missions in history where the Mayor’s office helped ease the patients’ hungry stomachs during the lunch break. By the way, Bokod residents are very kind, shy and patient, literally. Never in the entire two day mission was there any grumbling or complaining exhibited by everyone from the mayor to the humblest of the residents while they were under the heat of the sun waiting for their appointments. Makes you wish more people in the world had their character.

Continue to pray for Bokod COC to continue to grow and that members both from the local and Midtown would not wane in their service to God. Enjoy watching the pictures. God Bless!

Jun Reyes

| View Show | Create Your Own

RBC enrolls 33 students for the second semester

Thirty three students have enrolled the second semester program at the Rabon Bible College in San Fabian, Pangasinan. The school has started offering third year subjects. Brother Solomon Devera serves as director while brother Ephraim M. de Castro is dean. Assisting them in handling 21 subjects this second semester are Mel Ducusin, Ed Bacani, Elvie Limbawan, Adolfo Braga II, Jonathan Ramos, Pablo Lachica and Eusebio Tanicala. Pablo Lachica teaches NT Greek Grammar while Eusebio Tanicala teaches Biblical Hermeneutics.

Higher Meaning of the Word “One”

By Eusebio Tanicala, Ph. D.

(Note: This is another article that could give additional knowledge about the Holy Trinity which will increase understanding about Tritheism and Unitarianism as well. Please don’t teach weak arguments to our young preachers. These young preachers could be discouraged once they are confronted with the weakness of arguments they are initially taught. This is series #4).

In an earlier posting, we have submitted to you the English dictionary meaning of the cardinal numeral “one” which is represented by the Arabic symbol “1”. In Iloco – maysa; in Tagalog – isa; in Spanish – uno; in Latin – unus; in Greek – heis and its declined forms of mia, mian, mias, en, enos. We’ve suggested that clarifying the meaning of the word “one” is essential to the discussion and understanding of the oneness of God which we technically call monotheism (belief that there is one God).

In the English language, the basic meaning of the term “one” points to the number of a solid, single, individual object. When we talk about God, this elementary meaning of separate individuality tends to be the only idea that is in the mind of many people.

Our elementary science and elementary arithmetic have conditioned our five senses to think, feel, judge and conclude within this solid level. At this lower level of awareness, we limit the application of the tern “one” to a single, solitary, separate, individual, solid, impermeable, non-intersecting object. In the elementary grades, pupils count separate, solid, impenetrable, objects like sticks, stones, animals, birds, trees, plants, buildings, persons. Each individual object is labeled “one” (1).

In high school and college, however, the student’s mind is introduced to chemistry and modern math. In the field of chemistry, elements in liquid or gaseous forms put in separate containers could be mixed in test tubes which result to a transformation. The mixture is labeled “one” (1). For example two parts hydrogen and one part oxygen (H2O) becomes water (singular). Several agreeable food elements could be mixed together then frozen that would result to ice cream which is labeled “one” (1) or singular. Not plural. These are limited illustrations just to demonstrate fluidity in contrast to solidity.

Some chemical elements repulse each other so there’s no transformation, no combination, no harmony, no unity, no oneness comes out.

In modern math, there’s the Venn Diagram where the student is trained to think in the abstract level. As an illustration we think of Figure A intersecting Figure B and both intersect Figure C. There results a common area which is called the congruent area. In the area of congruence the three are considered “one.”

One could demonstrate the congruence or intersecting of elements in the gaseous level. Light three match sticks. When the 3 solid sticks are separated we see 3 separate flames, but when the 3 sticks are taken together we see one flame. On the solid portion there are three separate sticks, but on the gaseous portion, we see one flame. This is a limited illustration on the possibility of 3 becoming one as elements appear to the senses.

SCRIPTURAL TESTIMONY

On a higher degree above the liquid and gaseous states we have the world of the will, of ideas, of emotions. In theology and philosophy the categories we deal with are ideas, concepts, notions, emotions and will. These things emanate from the mind. When distinct persons come to possess the same idea, same concept, same desire and/or same emotion and/or same will, there results unity, harmony, congruence, coalescence. Writers and speakers use the word “one” to describe the harmonious state of the persons. The minds from whence the idea or emotion emanate are also said to be “one” (1).

Let’s analyze several verses using the NKJV. Luke 14:18, “they all with one accord began to make excuses.” John 17:21-23, “they all may be one” “they may be one” “they may be made perfect in one.” Acts 4:32,“those who believe were of one heart and one soul.” See also Acts 5:12; Romans 12:4,5 “one body” “we being many members are one body.” Romans 15:5-6, “be like-minded . . . you may with one mind and one mouth glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. See also 2 Cor. 13:11. In 1 Cor. 12:12, 13, “the body is one … members of that one body being many, are one body…” 1 Cor. 12:20, “many members, yet one body.” Phil. 1:27, “one mind.” See also 1 Cor. 1:10 and Eph. 4:3.

The harmony, unity, congruence of ideas and emotions of the disciples made the several individuals be labeled “one” (1). This is the oneness of the ideal groom and bride spoken of in Gen. 2:22-26; Matt. 19:4-6 and Eph. 5:30-31 that in the counting made by Yahweh, by Christ and by Apostle Paul the cardinal number used is “one” (1). To exaggerate their spiritual, moral, emotional oneness the label is even applied on the flesh – the two persons become “one flesh.” How could we explain two distinct persons in the state or being of flesh become “one flesh” after the bride and groom are pronounced husband and wife? Again, we ask, did Yahweh use multiplication? Did He say, “Adam and Eve, I multiply 1 Adam X 1 Eve, so you two are now one flesh”? No. Did the Apostle Paul say, “Multiply the cardinal number of the bride times the cardinal number of the groom and that makes them husband and wife, one flesh?” No. Therefore, the math formula of multiplication or division does not explain the oneness of the Godhead.

CONGRUENT ATTRIBUTES

The unity, harmony between the ideal husband and wife as well as the unity and harmony of Christian disciples, in a limited way, illustrate the unity and harmony of the Three Persons in the Godhead. In the Holy Trinity, the congruence, coalescence, intersecting, inter-relating of attributes are so perfect and complete that we could not find any iota of discord or disharmony. No distance, no separation. Same in the attributes of omnipotence, same in omniscience, same in omnipresence, same in eternity, same in holiness, all three wear the excellent name of Yahweh, all three participated in the creation of the invisible and visible worlds, and so on.

Only three persons can come up to the level and possession of the above omnific attributes of deity: the Father, the Son, the Holy Spirit.

LEXICAL MEANING

Please evaluate what Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, (1977, pp. 186-187) says about the term “one” (heis):

“b. in app. to a division into parts, and in ethical matters to dissensions: he soma polla mele, Roma.12:4 sq.; I Cor. 12:12,20; hen enai, to be united most closely (in will, spirit), Jn 10:30; 17:11, 21-23; en heni pneumatic, mia psuche, Phil.1:27cf. Acts 4:32 … apo mias …, Luke 14:18 xxxxx c. one and the same (not at variance, with, in accord with one’s self): Rom. 3:30; Rev. 17:13, 17; 18:8; to hen phronein, Phil. 2:2; hen einai are one, i.e. are of the same importance and esteem, 1 Cor. 3:8; eis to hen einai (see eimi; v. 2 d.), 1 Jn. 5:8; more fully to en kai to auto, 1 Cor. 12:11, hen kai to auto tini, 1 Cor. 11:5”.

We would like to point to the parts where the above quotation tells of situations or conditions or states that are called “one.” They are the following (1) “to be united most closely in will, spirit,” (2) “one and the same (not at variance, with, in accord with one’s self),” and (3) “same importance and esteem.” The Father and Christ are “united most closely” which is why Christ said his teachings come from the Father and all that the Father possess are also the possession of Christ, and what the Father works out, Christ also does. In the level of deity, the Father and Christ have the same “importance and esteem,” which is why Christ declared that the honor given to the Father should be the same degree of honor given to the Son. See John 5:23.

In view of the above, it is clear that the term “one” is not limited to pointing to the single, independent, individual, solid object or person. Also the Greek Lexicon does not cite multiplication or division to arrive at oneness or unity. However, if anyone has a lexicon that submits multiplication or division as an explanation of the oneness of the Godhead, I’d be happy to buy a copy of that book. Please show me such a lexicon.

I appeal to our aging preachers and Bible College teachers who use weak arguments to stop passing on to young preachers their lightweight and unvalidated theological opinions. ##

Help little Hidenell

I am reprinting an e-mail I received from Bro. Moises Gonzalez whose son is suffering from Autism and is in need of help. Details on how to reach the family is also in the letter. Please contact them and offer them your help or at least prayers for little Hidenell.

—
Dear Brethren,

Greetings in the name of Jesus our Lord. I am writing in behalf of my youngest son, Hidenell Pete Gonzales. He was diagnosed to have Autism Spectrum Disorder, a condition that affects behavior, communication skills, learning capability and social interaction. He is now six years old, but acts like a three-year old kid. He is hyperactive most of the time and shows disruptive behavior such as banging his head on the wall, whenever his wants are not granted. We enrolled him in a public special education program and was assessed to be high functioning. This means he has a greater chance to be developed and be productive that may even lead to a normal life.This can only be made possible if he will be able to undergo series of therapies for about 3 months to a year. As of now we cannot afford the high cost of special therapy for my child. He needs three sessions a week, each costing PhP400. We need at least PhP 4800 a month and about PhP 57, 600 a year.

I am appealing to you brethren; a little help for Hidenell will determine his future. Whatever help you can provide for us will be very much appreciated and remembered. Thank you very much.

In Christ,

Bro. Moises A. Gonzales
Evangelist, Batangas area
moisesagonzales@ yahoo.com

S/A No. 3145025126
Moises A. Gonzales
Metrobank, Lipa Branch
Contact number: +639205130485

Emilio Panday Reports

From January 2008 to November 15th, a total of 51 baptisms have been tallied by brother Emilio Panday in the Baguio-Benguet area. This total is the result of joint efforts of the Philippine Missionary Academy, World Bible School, Body & Soul Ministry and the Centerpoint Church of Christ wherein brother Panday serves as one of the evangelists.

Dictionary Definition of Cardinal Numeral “One”

By Eusebio Tanicala, Ph.D.

(Note: This is another article that could help increase our knowledge about the Holy Trinity and which will in turn jack up understanding about Tritheism and Unitarianism. Please don’t teach weak arguments to our young people and young preachers. These young preachers could be discouraged once they are confronted with the weakness of arguments they are initially taught. Weak arguments could easily be knocked down by those who know logic and mathematics. This is series #3).

In the study about the Godhead, about the Trinity and about the deity of Christ, a good knowledge of the word “one” which is the cardinal numeral one represented by the Arabic sign 1 is a must. Those who believe in Unitarianism focus on the word “one.” To a Unitarian, there is only one God and the manifestations as Father or Son or Holy Spirit is only one person manifesting in different modes.

Focus is also on the term “one” by those who believe that Christ is not deity but a mere human being who is endowed with heavenly powers. Siya ay tao lamang, sabi nila. There’s only one God, there’s only one person who is called God and He is the Father, they claim.

Defining the cardinal numeral “one” should therefore be an important step in any discussion of the Godhead, Trinity or Christ’s deity. When the word is properly defined and when the definition is agreed upon by the three groups (Unitarian, psilanthropist, Trinitarian), then the issues may become clearer.

Funk & Wagnalls Standard Dictionary of the English Language, Vol. 2, p. 883 says defines the word “one.”

As an adjective the term “one” has the following meanings:

1. Being a single individual or object; being a unit.
2. Being an individual or thing thought of as indefinite.
3. Designating a person, thing, or group as contrasted with another; this; that.
4. Single in kind; the same; closely united or alike.

As a noun the term “one” has the following meanings:

1. A single unit; the cardinal number preceding two; also, a symbol (1, i, I).
2. A single thing or person.

As a Trinitarian, you should be very observant and analytical on your material. Watch carefully #1 meaning on both adjective and noun usages. The term one could refer to a “unit.” Unit refers to a group or several individuals in a group. In military language, a squad or a platoon or a company is a unit. Note the #4 meaning under the adjective usage. We repeat the quotation: “Single in kind; the same; closely united or alike.”

First idea: The three persons in the Godhead belong to a single “kind.” The term kind refers to a single essence or single substance, belonging to one class, or one type.

Second idea: The three persons in the Godhead are the same in their being pure spirit existence, same omnipotence, same in omnipresence, same in omniscience, same in being eternal.

Third idea: The three persons in the Godhead are closely united because they are congruent and coalescent in their major attributes in the Godhead like holiness, teaching, power, etc. Fourth idea: The three are also united. Please see John 7:16; 14:24; 16:14; 16:15; 17:10.

For example John 10:30, Christ said, “I and my Father are one.” (See NKJV) One in type/class/category/essence. One or same in the attributes mentioned above. This is the reading from The Great Book, The New Testament in Plain English, “Jesus answered them ‘I told you, but you didn’t believe. I am doing miracles with my Father’s authority. These are telling the truth about me, but you don’t believe, because you are not my sheep. My sheep listen to my voice. I know them. They follow me. I give them eternal life. They will never be lost. No one will snatch them out of my hand. My Father is stronger than anyone. No one can snatch them from my Father’s hand. He has given me all things. My Father and I are united.’”

Psilanthropists and Muslims refer to this oneness as the harmony of the Father and Christ in the pastoral care of believers. Only in pastoral care, they say. But in the text it is not pastoral care only. Father & Son care for the flock. Father & Son do miracles. Father & Son give life. Father has given to the Son all things. So in John 16:12-15 Jesus claims that what the Holy Spirit will teach, that truth comes from the Father and the Son. So they are one in teaching. One in authority. The Holy Spirit glorifies the Son, the Son glorifies the Father, the Father glorifies the Son. What belongs to the Father belongs to Christ, too.

(Note: Evidently Christ was not referring to multiplying or dividing the cardinal number of his person as “one-1” and the cardinal number of the Father’s person as “one-1” The impression formed in the minds of the Jewish audience in vs. 31-39 eliminates the idea of multiplication or division as a meaning of the term “one.”)

Analyze the prayer of our Lord in John 17:11, 21-23. John 10:30 should be interpreted by John 17:11, 21-23. Deeper contemplation on this unity of the Father and the Son leads you to a higher level of unity, agreement, congruence, coalescence, harmony besides pastoral care of believers. The expressions “you in me and I in you” “they in us” are not referring to pastoral work.

Do we apply multiplication or division to arrive at the oneness Christ prayed for among believers? No. We are crazy if we did. Is it enough that you place the X sign of multiplication between the physical bodies of disciples to create their unity? No. Did Apostle Paul put multiplication signs between the physical bodies of the factionalists in 1 Cor. 3 to solve the problem he was complaining of? No. When congregational members today have factions do we attain unity by painting the X sign between persons as they are seated inside the chapel? No. When Paul and Barnabas had differences, did they paint the X sign on the ground where they both stood to effect unity? No.

Instead of brandishing the “math bluff” please get the meaning from the linguistic authorities. The believers’ oneness is in their becoming a separate unit, a separate group from the rest of sinful humanity and governed and bonded together by the moral code of Christ. The believers as a unit form another type or another class of people contrasted to the sinful world. The believers, although distinct in personalities, will be the same in doctrine and morality, closely united in the one body of Christ, the church. Oneness is in the higher plane – in the mind, in the emotion, in morality, in spiritual action.

I appeal to our aging preachers and Bible college teachers who use weak arguments to stop passing on to young preachers their lightweight, undocumented, unvalidated theological opinions.

(Note: A fourth article submits proofs on the use of the cardinal numeral one on the abstract level. – ET)

Evangelism Seminar Set for December 22-24

The facilities at 31 Samar Avenue in Quezon City, Metro Manila will be the venue of this year’s National Evangelism Workshop & Seminar, according to brother Jun Patricio. Devotional and gospel speakers as well as resource persons are the following: Fred Angangan, Jhun Ma, Felix Barvo, Neph Sico, Bob Buchanan, Conrado Mapalo, Willie Franco, Randy Macapagal, Reuben Emperado and Eusebio Tanicala.

1 Divided by 1 Divided by 1 = Ignorance

By Eusebio Tanicala

(Note: This is the second of a series that seeks to increase our knowledge about the Holy Trinity which in turn should give us better understanding what Tritheism and Unitarianism teach. Please don’t teach weak arguments to our young preachers. These young preachers could become discouraged when confronted by those who spot the fallacies in the youngsters’ arguments that they are initially taught to employ. Weak arguments make apologists of the other side heap contempt on their opponents; weak or wrong arguments actually promote others to continue on with their errors. This is series #2).

Trinitarians are monotheistic. Trinitarians believe that there are three distinct persons in the one true God. But many don’t know the explanation how it is possible that there are three distinct persons in the one Godhead.

Systematic dogmatic theology has this axiom: “God is indivisible.” But here come some Trinitarian Bible teachers who brandish their ignorant, bluff formula: “1 divided by 1 divided 1 equals one God.” This statement is not an accepted mathematical or theological formula. It reveals mathematical ignorance. It reveals theological self-contradiction.

Why self-contradictory? It is self-contradictory because it is a settled dogma in systematic theology that “God is indivisible.” Why say that God is indivisible, why say that God should not be thought of in separate parts and then in the next step you offer the mathematical formula of division to explain the triune Godhead? Dogmatic theology warns us not to say “The Father is one God, the Son is one God, the Holy Spirit is one God.” This is a wrong statement. It is tritheistic.

Why is it mathematical ignorance? It is so because the rule in math says that the description of the dividend must be the description of the result. A Trinitarian believes that the three 1’s are the three persons. So the submitted formula should read this way, “1 person divided by 1 person divided 1 person equals 1 person.” But why should anyone divide the number of one person by the number of the other persons? It’s foolishness. Why do these Bible teachers put ‘God” as the description of the result? They don’t follow the rule of mathematics.

We should also recognize the fact that no author or speaker in the whole Bible ever taught that applying the mathematical operation of multiplication or division explains the oneness/unity of the Godhead. None of the church fathers who understood the Greek text of the first century ever employed multiplication or division to explain the trinity of the Godhead. No theologian of note in the past one thousand years ever employed multiplication or division to explain the trinity. No mathematician in our Christian universities and colleges ever came out with multiplication or division to compute the number of the Godhead.

I suspect that some Pinoys who didn‘t have a single subject in systematic dogmatic theology, some Pinoys who didn’t know the New Testament Greek text, some Pinoys who didn’t have a college degree in mathematics invented this horrific formula.

On the basis of the preceding facts, I appeal to our aging preachers and Bible college teachers who use weak arguments to stop passing on to young preachers their lightweight and unvalidated theological opinions.

I continue on writing about this “mathematical bluff” because about the middle of this current year, I heard two Bible college students practicing their arguments about the Trinity. One said, “You teach that the Father is God, and the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God, di mo ba alam na 1 plus 1 plus 1 is equal to three? So you have three Gods.” The second student retorted, “Di mo ba alam ang division na 1 divided by 1 divided 1 is equal to 1?” I told these students that such kind of argumentation or presumption they were making was wrong and foolish. I’ve promised them that after they shall have finished their first year subjects, I shall give them my explanation.

(Note: A third article further develops this study on the cardinal numeral one. -ET) ###

1 x 1 x 1 = Tritheism

by Eusebio Tanicala

(Note: I’m presenting a series of articles to help increase our knowledge about the Holy Trinity which in turn would improve our understanding on Tritheism and Unitarianism. Weak arguments make apologists of the other side sneer at us and make them continue to believe what they presently promote. Young preachers who repeat wrong arguments could be discouraged when confronted by those who spot the fallacies in the weak evidences that they are initially taught to employ in teaching basic doctrines. This is series #1).

Trinitarians are monotheists. Trinitarians believe there’s one true God. However, some who say they are Trinitarian in belief talk and interpret some Bible passages that reveal Tritheism (belief in three Gods). They say they are monotheistic but their terminologies are Tritheistic.

Some preachers who struggle to explain their monotheism try to demonstrate their belief via the mathematical operation of “one times one times one equals one God OR 1 x 1 x 1 = 1 God.” But this statement is not logical. It is not mathematics either because the subject matter is God. Trinitarians believe that there are three persons in the one Godhead. So what some misinformed preachers are actually saying is “one person times one person times one person equals one God OR 1 person x 1 person x 1 person = 1 God.”

Because the answer in their equation is “God” it is understood that these preachers want to discuss about God. If the three one’s are 1 God x 1 God x 1 God = 1 God, then they are saying there are three Gods. Another thing that comes out from their terminologies is that they want to say that “the Father is one God and the Son is one God and the Holy Spirit is one God.” This is Tritheism no matter how much they would deny. What they want to say is 1 person x 1 person x 1 person = 1 God. But this is not consistent because the nature or description of the multiplicand should be the nature of the result.

Applying the mathematical operation of multiplication or division also reveals an act of dividing or individualizing or separating the persons of the Godhead. Dogmatic Theology states that “God is indivisible.” Furthermore, Trinitarian theologians advise us to say that the persons of the Godhead are distinct persons but not separate persons. God is omnipresent. The Father being God is omnipresent; the Son being God is also omnipresent. To separate the two persons means to create a dividing gulf between them. That dividing gulf would become a space where God is not. That would make the gulf a vacuum where God is not present. The three persons always co-exist in harmony and are always congruent in their presence.

Trinitarian terminology, on the other hand, goes this way: “The Father is God, the Son is God, the Holy Spirit is God. There are three persons in one God.” Multiplication or division is not employed. To arrive at the oneness of God’s being is to employ well researched knowledge on language by consulting your lexicon, thesaurus or unabridged dictionary. The word “one” is used in various ways. The cardinal numeral one (1) is not limited to pointing to a single, solitary, separate, solid object. One other meaning, among several meanings, is unity.

I appeal to aging preachers and Bible College instructors to stop using the above “1 x 1 x 1= 1 God bluff.” It is not dogmatically correct, not mathematically correct, not an approved Trinitarian formula.

(Note: A second articles makes a follow-up on this issue.- ET)

Angels and Messengers and Felix Manalo

By Eusebio Tanicala

This article further explains the issue raised by the question of Reggie A. Samonte.

Mr. Felix Manalo claimed that he is the fulfillment of the “ascending angel” of Revelation 7:1-3. He explained that another meaning of “angel” is “messenger” and he claimed to be the “last messenger of God in the last days.” And that with the advent of his preaching in 1914, the last era of the world started.

Let’s notice several things that are prompted by Mr. Manalo’s claims:

If Mr. Manalo were truly an angel-messenger in fulfillment of Rev. 7:1-3 and he said he is the last messenger of God he virtually said there’s no more angel after Rev. 7:1-3 and no more angel-messengers after Rev. 7:1-3.

This interpretation of Mr. Manalo which is promoted by INC apologists today is very illogical and not factual based on the Book of Revelation. Why? Because after Rev. 7:1-3 we read many more angel-messengers in the Book of Revelation. Notice verses that tell us of other angel-messengers: Rev. 8:3 “another angel came and stood;” 8:7 “the first angel sounded;” 8:8 “the second angel sounded;” 8:10 “the third angel sounded;” 8:12 “the fourth angel sounded;” Rev. 9:1 “the fifth angel sounded;” 9:13 “the sixth angel sounded;” 9:15 “Four angels release;” 10:11 “another angel came down;” 10:5 “the angel which I saw;” 11:15 “the seventh angel sounded;” 14:6 “I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven having the everlasting gospel;” 14:8 “another angel followed;” 14:9 “the third angel followed them;” 14:15 “another angel came out of the temple, crying with a loud voice to him that sat on the cloud;” 14:17 “another angel came out of the temple which is in heaven, he also having a sharp sickle;” 14:18 “another angel came out of the altar;” Rev. 15:6 “Seven angels came out of the temple;” 16:1-21 there are seven angels acting one after the other; 18:1 “I saw another angel come down from heaven;” 18:21 “a mighty angel took a stone;” 19:17 “I saw an angel standing in the sun;” 20:1 “an angel coming down from heaven;” 22:8 “the angel who showed me these things;” 22:16 “Jesus sent his angel.”

By saying that he was the last messenger-angel, Mr. Manalo denies the existence of these angels we have just cited. Which do you believe, the claim of Mr. Manalo or what you read in the Bible?

By claiming that he is God’s last angel-messenger in the last days, Mr. Manalo was saying that his ministry belongs to the last era of the world. But Rev. 6:12-17 and 7 is under the Sixth Seal. There’s a Seventh Seal or a Seventh Era that starts in Rev. 8:1 with other angel-messengers. This means that Mr. Manalo and his apologists today do not pay attention to other details in the Book of Revelation.

Very interesting indeed is Rev. 14:6- 7 which says, “And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people, saying with a loud voice, ‘Fear God, and give glory to him for the hour of his judgment is come: and worship him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters.’” This should tell us that the claim of Mr. Manalo that he is the “last angel-messenger” is false because Rev. 14:6-7 is much later than Rev. 7:1-3. This angel in Rev. 14:6-7 preached the everlasting gospel to all that dwell on earth, every nation, every kindred, every tongue, and people. Note that the angel in Rev. 7 was assigned to mark only 144,000 of the tribe of Israel before the outbreak of the First World War in 1914 as claimed by INC interpreter. It would be interesting to ask if Mr. Manalo and his ministers limited their ministry to the 144,000 of Israel before the First World War. If not, why not?

Glory and Honor before Creation (Part VI)

Christ’s Persona before Incarnation (Series 6)

By Eusebio Tanicala, Ph. D.

This is the last of a series on the status of the Logos: whether He was a spirit persona or merely a plan or a concept in God’s mind before Christ’s incarnation in A.D. 1.

OBJECTIVE

After reading and reflecting on the passages submitted below, you should be able to make a conclusion which is more logical to believe: (a) Before the incarnation of Christ, the Logos was a spirit persona, or (b) Before the incarnation of Christ, the Logos was a plan, a concept or a promised idea in God’s mind.

The following passages are for serious reflection:

John 17:5 – “Jesus spoke these words, lifted up His eyes to heaven, and said: ‘Father, the hour has come, Glorify Your Son, that Your Son also may glorify You. …And now, O Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was.”

This glorious majesty of deity was possessed by Christ with the Father before the world was created. But Christ laid aside temporarily this glorious appearance and “made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men.” Phil. 2:7(NKJV) This emptying lasted 33 years only.

Christ voluntarily switched off, so to speak, this glorious, blinding light that surrounded his persona in heaven. During this 33 years of incarnation, Christ had this glorious light switched on for a few seconds in a limited high voltage which was witnessed by the apostles Peter, James and John on the Mount of Transfiguration with Moses and Elijah standing as witnesses as related in Matt. 17:2, “His face shone like the sun, and His clothes became as white as the light.” Another account has this: “…the appearance of His face was altered, and His robe became white and glistening…who appeared in glory … and when they were fully awake they saw His glory and the two men who stood with Him.: (Luke 9:29-32)

When Christ was crucified by the Jews he was “Lord of glory” (1 Cor. 2:8).

After Christ went back to heaven, Saul of Tarsus who became later the Apostle Paul, encountered this same glorious, shining light switched on while traveling the road to Damascus. Luke records it this way: “As he journeyed he came near Damascus, and suddenly a light shone around him from heaven.” (Acts 9:3) Apostle Paul himself describes it this way: “…and came near Damascus at about noon, suddenly a great light from heaven shone around me.” (Acts 22:6)

During His sojourn on earth, while in the form of a lowly bondservant, Christ was worthy of worship with the same homage due to the Father. Our understanding of the Bible is that only deity is worthy of worship from man. Worship dedicated to anyone or anything other than deity is idolatry. Observe the following:
John 5:22-23, “For the Father judges no one, but has committed all judgment to the Son, that all should honor the Son just as they honor the Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent Him.”

Hebrews 1:6, “But when He again brings the firstborn into the world, He says: Let all the angels of God worship Him.” Matthew 2:11, talking about the magi from the east having reached Bethlehem “…had come into the house they saw the young Child with Mary His mother, and fell down and worshipped Him…”
Referring to Jesus’ arrest and the crucifixion, the apostles quoted Psalm 2 in their fervent prayers in Acts 4:25-26, “Why did the nations rage, and the people plot vain things? The kings of the earth took their stand, and the rulers were gathered together against the LORD and against His Christ.”

The above passages prove to us that Christ in His status as spirit persona in heaven had glory and honor with the Father. Such glory and honor could not logically be assigned to a plan or a promised idea.