Bible Study Lessons « W o r d M i n i s t r y

Does the fullness of the Godhead dwell in Jesus bodily? (3)

Does Holy Spirit personal presence in every believer divide the Holy Spirit? (4)

Does Satan personally influence people whom he seduces? (5)

Personal Influencing & Fruiting Presence of the Holy Spirit (7)

Some Activities of the Holy Spirit in Christian Life (8)

Some human acts against the person of the Holy Spirit (9)

The Person, Mission and Medium of the Holy Spirit Viewed in Various Biblical Periods (1)

Some human acts against the person of the Holy Spirit

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Views on September 14, 2009 at 4:26 pm

Personal Influencing & Fruiting Presence of the Holy Spirit (9)

By Eusebio Tanicala

Ang temang ito ang pinagdebatehan noong nakaraang taon sa Urdaneta City at Quezon City: “Resolved, that the Bible teaches that the Holy Spirit indwells, influences, and guides the Christian today only through the word of God.” Tapusin muna natin ito bago talakayin yaong “indwelling” kung referido ba sa individual Christian or the corporate church.

Sa mga sumusunod na talata, mababasa natin na human beings deal with a personal Holy Spirit. And if we deal with a personal Spirit and the Spirit being God, and God is everywhere, therefore, we are, some of the time, relating with a personal Holy Spirit. Christians are not always dealing with the impersonal written/oral word. Notice the following passages.

Men strives versus the Holy Spirit. Genesis 6:3 and James 5:4 talk about the Holy Spirit striving with men. This suggests that on the other side of the fence, humans are struggling against the will of the Holy Spirit. Genesis 6:6-7 says that the LORD (HS included) was sorry and was grieved. This is personal on the part of the Holy Spirit. Men’s striving against the Holy Spirit is what Romans 8:1-11 & Galatians 6:8 terms as “sowing in the flesh and reaping corruption.”

Men in the Book of Genesis didn’t merely strive or struggle with their mental knowledge God’s word. There’s an understood personal presence of the Spirit which the people disregarded. In like manner in James’ time and following generations men strive at the same level. Isaiah 63:10 says that the Israelites rebelled against God’s Holy Spirit and the Spirit turned Himself against the Israelites.

Men Could Lie Against the Holy Spirit. Acts 5:3-4 says that Ananias has lied to the Holy Spirit. This strongly suggests that Ananias directed his lying to a personal Holy Spirit and a personal Spirit responded with a death penalty against the culprits. Today believers who are seduced by the Devil don’t lie to the impersonal word and the impersonal word doesn’t impart physical penalty.

Men Could Test the Holy Spirit. Acts 5:9 says that Sapphira had tested the Holy Spirit. This reveals a relationship with a personal Holy Spirit and the penalty response is from a personal Holy Spirit. Our modern writing style doesn’t refer to any person testing the written word of God.

Men Could Grieve the Holy Spirit. Ephesians 4:30 says, “…do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God…” Grief is an emotion just like Genesis 6 tells of God being sorry for having created men and was grieved for their continual rebellion. King Saul’s repeated disobedience grieved the Holy Spirit that dwelt in him. King David’s adultery and murderous acts grieved the Holy Spirit but he repented and prayed that the Spirit be not taken away from him. In Isaiah’s time, the Israelites “rebelled and grieved” the Holy Spirit says Isaiah 63:10. All these cases are suggestive of dealing with a persona. We don’t speak today of grieving the written or oral word.
Men Could Quench the Holy Spirit. 1Thes. 5:19, “Quench not the Holy Spirit.” This reveals emotion so it means that we are relating with a personal being that has emotion and one that personally reacts. Today we don’t ever speak about believers quenching the written or oral word.
When the Holy Spirit empowers a teachable disciple the Spirit is victorious. Acts 6:10, “…were not able to resist the wisdom and the Spirit by which he spoke.” This, connected with Acts 6:5, suggests a personal Holy Spirit that gives courage and excellence in speech. The empowering personal Spirit is different from the speech of the disciple.
Men Could Resist the Holy Spirit. Acts 7:51, “…You always resist the Holy Spirit; as your fathers did, so do you.”

This suggests that men’s stubbornness or disobedience is a resistance against a personal Spirit.

Men Could Blaspheme the Holy Spirit. Matt. 12:312 & Mk 3:29, “…but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven men.” This is a strong suggestion that some acts of men are directed against a persona.
Men Could Speak Against the Holy Spirit. Matt. 12:32, “…whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven him, either in this age or in the age to come.”
Ananias and Sapphira Wagered with a Personal Satan. Acts 5:3. Whys is Satan a persona in this chapter but not the Holy Spirit? The Spirit was given to Ananias and Sapphira after their baptism, but the roaring lion Devil (1 Peter 5:8) doesn’t spare even those in the church. Beware because Satan could even go and make a wager in the inner sanctum of the heavens. Read Job 1 & 2.

Satan was able to lure out Judas Iscariot from among the 12 disciples of Jesus (Luke 21:3) and this is a personal Satan working. Satan could even penetrate the inner circle of our Lord. Beware! This is a personal Devil prowling around.

Jesus says, “Simon, Simon! Indeed, Satan has asked for you, that he may sift you as wheat. But I have prayed for you, that your faith should not fail; and when you have returned to Me, strengthen your brethren.” I believe that a personal Satan dared to wager with Christ Jesus. It was a special prayer of our Lord Jesus that saved Peter from total apostasy. Peter denied Jesus three times that fateful night, but he had an honest heart and a strong determination to do what is right. He bitterly cried that same night when his conscience bothered him. With the help of Christ’s prayer!

If Satan personally and tirelessly works against believers, we should consider the idea that a personal Holy Spirit is present to strengthen believers. Woe unto the person who thinks he and his mental understanding of the scriptures are sufficient protection against all the allurements of the Devil.

Yes, the Holy Scriptures are sufficient to give objective directions for right living but the flesh is subjectively weak. Just as the Law of God which was mediated by Moses was good and holy but man is the weak party. Read Romans 7. Sweet Eve promenaded with deity at the cool of day but in an unguarded moment an innocently talking seducer lured her mind, her taste buds and her stomach. She was forever trapped. King David sang all his sweetest praise psalms but his hormones overpowered his mind. King Solomon could recite his thousands of wisdom-filled proverbs and recite the best dedicatory prayers but his pride and lust swallowed him up. Judas Iscariot sat down at the feet of Jesus and drank from the pure sermon-fountains of the greatest teacher but shiny silver coins blinded him. An Apostle Peter, the primus inter pares, could proclaim his undying devotion to his Master but in a critical moment thrice denied his God and he needed a special prayer from his Teacher and a period of grace for him to mature. All of these favored people failed and needed God’s patience. I’d be most delighted to see a brother who claims to be more intellectually endowed than King Solomon, more inspired than King David, more devoted to a Master than Simon Peter or a sister who has daily walked with God in the cool of day who could claim to conquer Satan single handedly through his/her pure hermeneutics without the mediation of the Savior and intercession of the Holy Spirit.

After having presented different viewpoints on this issue I now state my position: “The Holy Spirit indwells, influences, guides the Christian today through the word of God, sometimes personally in conjunction with the word, and sometimes without the word but not contrary to the word.” The degree of influence of the Holy Spirit is dependent upon the degree of a person’s surrender to the Spirit and dependent upon the degree of possession the Holy Spirit has of the inner being of an individual.
I hope that this short article has given some clarification in our search for more light. Kung mayroong kahinaan ang
aming analysis, handa kaming tumanggap ng inyong pagtutuwid.

Does the fullness of the Godhead dwell in Jesus bodily? (3)

Does Holy Spirit personal presence in every believer divide the Holy Spirit? (4)

Does Satan personally influence people whom he seduces? (5)

Personal Influencing & Fruiting Presence of the Holy Spirit (7)

Some Activities of the Holy Spirit in Christian Life (8)

The Person, Mission and Medium of the Holy Spirit Viewed in Various Biblical Periods (1)

Some Activities of the Holy Spirit in Christian Life

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Views on September 14, 2009 at 4:18 pm

Personal Influencing & Fruiting Presence of the Holy Spirit (8)

By Eusebio Tanicala

Why is the presence of the Holy Spirit in the believer’s life a gift? Sa mga Pinoy ang agimat o anting-anting ay isang kaloob. Sinong Pinoy ang ayaw tatanggap ng isang agimat upang siya ay kagaya ni General Emilio Aguinaldo or President Ferdinand Marcos or Fernando Poe, Jr. or Ramon Revilla?

Anu-anong mga maibibigay ng Espiritu Santo sa isang mananampalataya? Lalo na sa spiritual na pamumuhay? Basahin ninyo ang mga sumusunod na talata:

Roma 5:5– Pours out God’s love into hearts;
Roma 8:9; Gal. 5:22-23 – Your life radiates with the fruit of the Spirit like love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control;
Gal. 5:25 –Walk in the Spirit or walk on safe spiritual ground;
Rom 8:13 – Helps us put to death works of the flesh;
Rom 8:4; Gal 5:8 – Leads us in spiritual path;
Romans 8:16 – Bears witness to our spirit before God;
Roma 14:17; Eph. 5:18—Creates joy in our hearts;
Roma 8:26-27 –Intercedes for the believer;
1 Cor. 12:7-9 – Distributes gifts of talents for ministry;
1 Cor. 12:13 – Helps in our obedience in baptism;
Eph. 2:18—Helps us in accessing the Father;
Phil. 3:3 & 1 Thes. 1:5-6; Eph 5:18-19—Helps us in worship;
2 Thes 2:13 & 1 Pet. 1:2 – Helps in our sanctification;
2 Tim. 1:14 – Helps us guard & keep pure the sound words of God;
Titus 3:5 –Helps in the renewal of our life;
1 Pet. 1:22 – Helps us in obeying the truth; Jude 20 – Helps us pray and build up faith;
Eph 3:16 –Helps strengthen with might the inner man.

Ang mga ito ay ilan lamang sa agimat na idinudulot o ipinagkakaloob ng Espiritu Santo. A successful believer who attains life eternal in heaven is “more than a conqueror.” A successful Christian life is greater than the exploits of Alexander the Great, Herod the Great, Constantine the Great, Charlemagne the Great, Gregory the Great, Charles the Great taken together.

Kung mayroong kahinaan ang aming analysis, handa kaming tumanggap ng inyong pagtutuwid.

Does the fullness of the Godhead dwell in Jesus bodily? (3)

Does Holy Spirit personal presence in every believer divide the Holy Spirit? (4)

Does Satan personally influence people whom he seduces? (5)

Personal Influencing & Fruiting Presence of the Holy Spirit (7)

The Person, Mission and Medium of the Holy Spirit Viewed in Various Biblical Periods (1)

Acts 2:38, Acts 2:39

The Gift in Acts 2:38 and the Promise in Acts 2:39

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Views on September 14, 2009 at 3:56 pm

Personal Influencing & Fruiting Presence of the Holy Spirit (7)

By Eusebio Tanicala

Ang temang ito ang pinagdebatehan noong nakaraang taon sa Urdaneta City at Quexon City: “Resolved, that the Bible teaches that the Holy Spirit indwells, influences, and guides the Christian today only through the word of God.” Tapusin muna natin ito bago talakayin yaong “indwelling” kung referido ba sa individual Christian or the corporate church.

Proper understanding of Acts 2:38’s “gift of the Holy Spirit” and Acts 2:39’s “promise” will greatly help us understand the presence of the Holy Spirit in the Christian’s life.

The promised pouring out and reception of the Holy Spirit among the Israelites was an anxiously awaited happening by the Jews. Why was possession of the Holy Spirit a much coveted gift? It was so because those in the OT who received the Holy Spirit, were great leaders, powerful workers, courageous fighters and outstanding artisans. Sa ating Pinoy ito ay katumbas ng agimat. Sa taga-Ilocos ito ay anting-anting. It’s a talisman and amulet. Sino ba naman ang ayaw magkaroon nito?

This Holy Spirit’s coming is both a prophecy and a promised gift from God. Please read Isaiah 11:2, Isa. 32:15;Joel 2:28-32; Zech. 12:10; Ezek. 36:27; 39:29; Luke 11:13; 24:49; John 14:16, 17, 26; John 16:7, 13; Acts 1:4-5; Acts 2:33; Acts 10:44-47 and 11:17. The promise and prophecy was not confined to the “baptismal measure.”

Reception of this pouring of the Holy Spirit in its Baptismal Measure on record was received by the Apostles in Acts 2:1-4. Other groups upon which the Holy Spirit directly descended were, first, the group in the house of prayer in Acts 4:23, 31which possibly included those who would become deacons in Acts 6:1-8; and secondly, that of Saul who later on became Apostle Paul in Acts 9:10-19 and the household of Cornelius in Acts 10:44-47.

On the other hand, those who received the Laying-on-of-Hands Measure on record are those in Acts 8:17-19 and Acts 19:6. It’s possible that others received this measure of the Holy Spirit as suggested in 1 Cor. 12 and 1 Cor. 14.

Another measure or degree of Holy Spirit presence as a gift is the Ordinary Measure. This degree is received by all who repent and are baptized into Jesus Christ. Apostle Peter declares this in Acts 2:38. Actual reception of this gift is recorded in Acts 5:322; Romans 8:11, 15; 1Cor. 6:19; Gal. 3:2; 3:14; Eph 1:13-14; Eph 2:22; 4::30; Phil. 2:1; Heb. 6:4 and James 5:4. Under the Ordinary Measure, are the charismatic gifts for administration, for teaching, strength of faith, charitable works, bountiful giving, etc. The Holy Spirit’s presence in the genuine Christian’s life serves as “seal of ownership” as well as “earnest, partial payment, down payment, guarantee, assurance of redemption.”

The baptismal measure, the laying-on-of-hands measure and the ordinary measure, are all parts of the promised pouring and coming of the Holy Spirit. There are many things that the Holy Spirit does to the obedient believer especially in the spiritual level which is why the Spirit is a spiritual agimat, a spiritual amulet which the Israelites desired.

Does the fullness of the Godhead dwell in Jesus bodily? (3)

Does Holy Spirit personal presence in every believer divide the Holy Spirit? (4)

Does Satan personally influence people whom he seduces? (5)

The Person, Mission and Medium of the Holy Spirit Viewed in Various Biblical Periods (1)

Does Satan personally influence people whom he seduces?

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Views on September 14, 2009 at 3:23 pm

Personal Influencing & Fruiting Presence of the Holy Spirit (5)

By Eusebio Tanicala

Note: Ang temang ito ang pinagdebatehan noong nakaraang taon sa Urdaneta City at Quezon City: “Resolved, that the Bible teaches that the Holy Spirit indwells, influences and guides the Christian today only through the word of God.” Tapusin muna natin ito bago talakayin yaong “indwelling” kung referido ba sa individual Christian or the corporate church.

Advocates of the “through the word only” influence of the Holy Spirit put a burden on the advocates of “personal indwelling.” Unknowingly, the seeming difficulty is a shared burden for both sides.

Let’s make a comparison and contrast table on the influencing and seducing personal work of Satan on one hand and the influencing and fruiting personal work of the Holy Spirit.

Let’s analyze 1 Peter 5:8-9, “Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil walks about like a roaring lion, seeking whom he may devour. Resist him, steadfast in the faith, knowing that the same sufferings are experienced by your brotherhood in the world.” (NKJV)

Now we ask “thro the word only” as well as the “personal indwelling” advocates to answer the following questions:

Is it possible for a personal Satan to be in 1,000 different barangays at the same one moment in time?
Is it possible for a personal Satan to roar at 1,000 different individuals at the same one moment in time?
Is it possible for a personal Satan to divide himself into 1,000 personal Satanitos that simultaneously go around in 1,000 different barangays and simultaneously tempt 1,000 different individuals at the same moment in time?
Satan is the God of this age says 2Cor. 4:4, is he everywhere around the world at the same moment in time?
When Satan roars and tempts every 1,000 individual at the same moment in time, does each individual Christian feel he is confronting a personally present Satan?
Who is more omnipresent Satan or the Holy Spirit?
Who is more omnipotent and omniscient the Holy Spirit or Satan?
If Satan employs individual evil spirits to act for him, could not the Holy Spirit employ good angels to act for Him?
Is it possible for the omnipresent and omnipotent Holy Spirit to be one person and yet make every individual believer feel that the Holy Spirit is personally dealing with him?
Is it against the scriptures for the omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient, immanent, transcendent God to personally attend simultaneously to the petitions of 1,000,000 believers at the same one moment in time?
Since the omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient, immanent, transcendent God is present everywhere, in heaven and on earth, does God’s presence both in heaven and on earth divide God into many Gods?
Since the Holy Spirit is God and God is everywhere, that makes the Holy Spirit persona present both in heaven and on earth, does the Holy Spirit’s presence in several places divide the Holy Spirit persona into several persons?

I suggest that both sides should answer the above questions and that no further argumentation be made unless these are given honest answers. Have a nice day reflecting on the questions. More short articles are forthcoming. Kung mayroong kahinaan ang aming analysis, handa kaming tumanggap ng inyong pagtutuwid.

Does the fullness of the Godhead dwell in Jesus bodily? (3)

▶ View 3 Comments

Does Holy Spirit personal presence in every believer divide the Holy Spirit?

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Views on September 14, 2009 at 2:56 pm

Personal Influencing & Fruiting Presence of the Holy Spirit (4)

By Eusebio Tanicala

One big obstacle from accepting the personal presence of the Holy Spirit in the believer today is the possibility of contradicting the theological dogma which states, “God is indivisible.”

Personal presence would mean, to the human mind, that each Christian today would have a dwarf Holy Spirit in him. If there were 1 billion believers today then there would be one billion dwarf Holy Spirit inhabiting every believer.

To help us confront the seeming difficulty, the doubter should first answer the following:

When the eternal divine nature (Godhead) of Christ dwelt/dwells in the human body of Christ, did/does the Holy Spirit became/become a dwarf Spirit reduced to the dimension of approximately 6 feet height, 2 feet width and 6 inches thickness human body size?
When the Holy Spirit descended and alighted on Jesus in the form of a dove, was the Holy Spirit’s size and personal presence reduced to the body size of a human being?
When the 12 apostles received the baptismal measure of the Holy Spirit, did the Holy Spirit divide Himself into 12 dwarf Spirits?
Did Moses and the 70 elders in Num. 11:23-30 each possess individual dwarf Holy Spirits? (5) When the Holy Spirit descended on the household members of Cornelius in Acts 10, did the Holy Spirit divide Himself into dwarf Spirits?

Should we subject deity under the law of solid matter? One solid matter can be present at one given moment in one given place. But an omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent deity could transcend time and space. A limited illustration could be television and tele-conferencing and tele-lecturing today. Today a lecturer could be in one place but can appear on big screens before big audiences in many countries simultaneously. And audiences could directly interact with the lecturer 10,000 miles away. That is the wonder of technology. And God is one billion times more wonderful than modern information technology. It should, therefore, be no worry to anyone when we talk about the Holy Spirit being present personally with every believer.

The above questions should be sincerely confronted and answered. We should confront the issue head on. What one puts as a burden on the advocate of “personal indwelling” is the same burden that the “through the word only” advocate should carry. Until these questions are answered no further argumentation should be done by those who are struggling about this issue. I wish you a peaceful day of reflection on God’s word. Kung may kanihaan ang aming analysis, handa kaming tumanggap ng inyong pagtutuwid.

Personal Influencing and Fruiting Presence of the Holy Spirit

Personal Influencing and Fruiting Presence of the Holy Spirit (3)

▶ View 5 Comments

Does the fullness of the Godhead dwell in Jesus bodily?

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Views on September 14, 2009 at 2:45 pm

Personal Influencing and Fruiting Presence of the Holy Spirit (3)

By Eusebio Tanicala

Note: Ang pinagdebatehan tema noong nakaraang taon sa Urdaneta City at Quezon City ay: “Resolved, that the Bible teaches that the Holy Spirit indwells, influences, and guides the Christian today only through the word of God.” Tapusin muna natin itong influence and guidance bago talakayin yaong “indwelling” kung referido ba sa individual Christian or corporate church. Gusto nating bigyang pansin itong “influences and guides” sapagkat may akusasyon na tayong nasa negative side of the proposition are “false teachers.” We have to explain our side of the issue.

Sa nakaraang sanaysay pinansin natin ang Col. 2:9. Ngayon idagdag natin ang Juan 1:14 para sa ating reflection in relation to the dwelling of the Godhead in Jesus Christ bodily. Ito ay basehan din ng ating pagmumunimuni ukol sa pananahan ng Espiritu sa buhay ng Cristiano.

“For in Him dwells the fullness of the Godhead bodily,” says Col. 2:9 (NKJV). hoti en auto katoikei pan to pleruma tis theotetos sumatikos.

The term “Godhead” says M.R.Vincent (Word Studies in the NT, 906), refers to “the essential and personal deity as belonging to Christ.” Bengel, another Greek scholar, is quoted as saying about the same word: “Not the divine attributes, but the divine nature.”

On the other hand, “bodily” means that deity is clothed with a body. (ibid.)

This description of the apostle Paul about the relationship of the personal divine nature of Christ with His human body is as mysterious as the Trinity. It’s so mind boggling when we ask the following questions:

(1) Which is larger in metric dimension, the personal divine nature of Jesus Christ or the human body of Jesus?
(2) Does the human nature of Christ encase the divine nature or vice versa?
(3) Was the divine essence of Christ personally present on earth during Christ’s earthly ministry?
(4) If the divine essence of Christ was personally present on earth during his 33 years of human existence on earth, was the presence of Christ’s deity limited to and confined within the bodily size of our Lord Jesus?
(5) During the 33 year period of Christ’s personal presence on earth, was Christ’s deity omnipresent, transcendent and immanent?
(6) Did/does the personal divine essence of Christ personally and directly dwell inside the human body of Christ?

Biblical chronology dates the Book of Colossians at 62-63 A.D. Since the verb “dwells” in Col. 2:9 is in the present tense, it is the stronger assumption that in heaven the resurrected body of Christ encases the fullness of deity. But there’s possibility that even during the earthly presence of Christ, the fullness of the Godhead dwelt in Jesus bodily. In either case, it baffles the mind how on earth can deity that is everywhere in the cosmos be encased in the human body of Jesus. It is, as previously illustrated, like someone tells you to put all the waters of Manila Bay into your coffee mug. But that is the language of Colossians 2:9. Just because we can’t explain this matter mathematically it doesn’t mean that it is false. Metrical length, width and depth should not be used to measure the omnipresence of Christ’s deity as much as we don’t use mensuration to count the Trinity and the unity of God. We should not also worry about the size of the human body whether or not it can contain a personal Holy Spirit.

We who are struggling about the presence and influence of the Holy Spirit in the Christian should answer the above questions. If these questions are fully answered, our doubts about the Holy Spirit’s presence will be lessened to a great extent.

There are more brief articles that follow this title. I hope that this is helpful. Kung may kahinaan ang aming analysis, handa kaming tumanggap ng inyong pagtutuwid.

The Person, Mission and Medium of the Holy Spirit Viewed in Various Biblical Periods (1)

Does the fullness of the Godhead dwell in Jesus bodily? (3)

Does Holy Spirit personal presence in every believer divide the Holy Spirit? (4)

Does Satan personally influence people whom he seduces? (5)

The Promise in Acts 2:39 (6)

▶ View 7 Comments

Personal Influencing & Fruiting Presence of the Holy Spirit (2)

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Views on September 14, 2009 at 2:39 pm

By Eusebio Tanicala

Gusto kong ibahagi ang aking pagmumunimuni ukol sa pagtulong ng Espiritu Santo sa mga alagad ng Panginoong Dios. Ito ay mga reflections ng isang senior citizen na dapat pagukulang pansin ng mga nakababatang mangangaral. Mayroon nang naunang mga kaisipan at katuruan ukol dito ngunit gusto kong dagdagan ang mga ito o di kaya ituwid ang ilan sa mga kurukurong ito.

Preachers and teachers among Churches of Christ love to submit Col. 2:9 as proof of Christ’s deity. And we are correct in this. But in relation to our belief in the work of the Holy Spirit we seem to deny some lines of reasoning that branch off from the verse.

If Christ’s divine nature resided/resides in Jesus’ human body, is it possible that the Holy Spirit is personally present in a Christian’s human body today? Or is it more reasonable to believe that the divine nature of Jesus resided or was/is present in Jesus’ body through the word only as processed by his human mind? Tatanggapin ng ilang mga kapatid na nanahan ang Espiritu Santo sa katawan ng Panginoong Jesus sapagkat Siya ay Anak ng Dios ngunit hindi nila matanggap na ang Espiritu ay mananahan sa isang hamak na tao lamang. Nakakatakot ngang isipin ano?

John 1:14 is also one of our favorite verses. We believe that the Word (Christ’s name per Rev. 19:13) is a persona and that persona fused and became one with the human nature that was conceived by the Virgin Mary through the power of the Holy Spirit. And when the Holy Spirit came upon the Virgin Mary (Matt. 1:18,20; Luke 1:35) was it personally the Holy Spirit that wrought this miracle? Or was it through the word as processed/comprehended by the Virgin Mary’s mind? Even if an angel was sent to Mary, was it still the personal work of the Holy Spirit?

In discussing this personal presence of the Holy Spirit, we apply the basic assumptions in dogmatic theology which are the following: (1) There is one God and this one God is three persons in unity; (2) God is immanent at the same time transcendent– meaning God is both outside and inside the material cosmos, inside and outside of the human body; (3) God is indivisible – meaning we can’t separate and set distances among the three persons ; (4) God—the three persons—is omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient capable of telephony, telepathy, television and teletransporting; (5) There are focalized or fruiting spots in the presence of God which means that God (Holy Spirit included) sovereignly bestows gifts and graces upon individuals as He wills; (6) When a Christian worships/prays to God it is a personal God he approaches and it is a personal God that accepts or hears and it is a personal God that responds; and (7) When God (Holy Spirit included) chastises a disciple He loves, it is a personal God that does the chastising (Heb.12:3-11) and not the word.

Sana pagmunimunihan ninyo ang mga bagay na ito. Aabot ng sampu ang gagawing serye ukol sa paksang ito. God bless all of us in our study of His word. Kung may kahinaan ang ating analysis, handa kaming tumanggap ng inyong pagtutuwid.

Does the fullness of the Godhead dwell in Jesus bodily? (3)

Does Holy Spirit personal presence in every believer divide the Holy Spirit? (4)

Does Satan personally influence people whom he seduces? (5)

The Original Sin of Eve (Series #3)

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Views on July 31, 2009 at 4:28 am

By Eusebio Tanicala

This series about original sin is related to the forthcoming discussion on “inherited” sin. I would like you to remember the original sin of the Devil that it was done with the free will of Lucifer and also done freely by his followers, that angels that rebelled.

In Series #2 we have discussed the situation of Adam and Eve before the Fall. Endowed with free will, sufficient knowledge about God, our first parents had tasted the fellowship of God in the Garden. Both were free from any sin. In this Series #3, we discuss the original sin of Eve in the Garden of Eden.

Eve committed the first human sin. Did God decree that Eve should commit sin? No, or else God is the author of sin. Did God purpose that Eve should fall so that God could show His benevolence and be glorified for His kindness? No, or else God is the source of evil which He Himself abhors.

To this writer there are four factors that interplay in the fall of Eve. These are: (1) Eve’s possession of Free Will; (2) The presence in the Garden of Eden of this aggressive, clever, crafty, scheming, seducing enemy, the Devil; (3) God’s permission for the Devil to dialogue with Eve and present her with severe temptations; and (4) The seeming need for God to test the undivided loyalty of Eve through a temptation.

Which of these factors dominate, we are not sure. But the fact is there: Eve succumbed to the seduction and through her the first sin entered into the world. Eve reached out and picked the fruit and ate it. She gave a bite to her husband Adam. Adam seems to have readily accepted the fruit offered to him.

What could have been Eve’s emotions, longings, desires and expectations while she had the dialogue with the Devil, the Snake, at the middle of the Garden under the tree that bore the fruit that gives knowledge of good and evil? We could surmise the following: (1) Eve was aware of God’s prohibition; (2) Eve was aware of the penalty of disobedience which is death; (3) She was adventurous, daring, inquisitive and curious because she went near the tree that bore the prohibited fruit; (4) She was a brave woman because she dared to talk to a Snake that could talk which should be an unusual occurrence; (5) Her taste buds salivated when the Devil made the fruit appear very unique and invitingly fresh and luscious; (6) Her trained eyes determined that the fruit was no different from other fruits in the garden and that it was good for food; (7) She hasn’t experienced yet the horror or pain of death; (8) The fruit, as promised by the Snake, would give knowledge and wisdom; (9) She knew and felt she could exercise her Free Will or make her own decision; and (10) Her stomach longingly churned to receive the invitingly fresh and luscious fruit.

All the major longings and desires of humanity were there in Eve: adventure and curiosity, wisdom, tinker with what is beautiful, satisfaction of the appetite, going up to the highest level of knowledge and wisdom because she was assured by the Devil she would be as wise as God, attached to a high level of wisdom is authority and power, was assured that the penalty of death was not forthcoming, and she felt her freedom – she could exercise her own choice.

All these items were sufficient in Eve’s time to make her decide and act. If present today in any situation, an individual would easily succumb to any invitation offered by the Devil. On the other hand if Eve were left alone, she could have reflected on the warnings given by God and debated herself. But there was the mesmerizing, hypnotizing and seductive suggestions pouring out from the mouth of the Devil that drowned any reflections she wanted to make about her relationship with God. She was under the spell of Satan.

What could have been the push, pull or pressure that the Devil exerted on the emotion and mind of Eve? The following are possible: (1) Based on narratives today, when a human comes under the spell of a spirit, the human mind comes into stupor or trance and suggestions are easily accepted – one is hypnotized; (2) Having been an archangel with great knowledge and experience in the art of seduction, the Devil had an undue advantage over an innocent, inexperienced young woman; (3) Brought up in the innocence and purity of the Garden of Eden, Eve tended to believe every new idea she heard; (4) The titillating appearance of a good looking, luscious fruit was hard to resist; (5) She was possibly hungry at the time she went out so there was the intense pleasure evoked by expectation of swallowing the luscious fruit, (6) Being a veteran of the art of seduction, the Devil inveigled the young, innocent woman with empty assurances; (7) the promise of attaining a high level of wisdom which would equal that of God’s was so irresistible; (8) The assurance that death was not coming, and she didn’t know anything about death, Eve became more adventurous; and (9) the intense, immediate pleasure in the flesh evoked by the senses of sight, taste buds, churning stomach overpowered the less intense delight of spiritual joys among the young and inexperienced.

Delights of the flesh are intense, overpowering and are immediately felt. Among the innocent and the inexperienced, fleshly delights could easily drown the distant delights of a heavenly paradise.

It is only when a person reaches old age that she would learn to prefer spiritual joys to the pleasures of the flesh. After many years of struggle a person comes to learn that fleshly delights are only fleeting. Some delightful experiences may even lead to body pains. Eve was young and inexperienced when she was confronted by the Devil. Being young and inexperienced the pleasure of the flesh was stronger than the delights of spiritual things. Sometimes hindsight is better than foresight. #

(Note: Series #4 will discuss the Federal Theory of passing on to the next generation the Sin of Adam. This is called Inherited Sin. Parents from the time of Adam and Eve, according to this Federal Theory, automatically pass on a certain kind of sin to their children. A sin which even the precious blood of our Lord Jesus Christ could not wash, could not remit, could not blot, could not expiate, could not cover. A sin that God could not forget and forgive until every human being shall have gone to hell or to heaven.)

Continuity or Restoration?

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Views on April 23, 2009 at 4:08 pm

By Eusebio Tanicala, Ph.D.

Among us in the Churches of Christ, there are three points of view about the history of the church. These are (1) Uninterrupted continuity from the first century to the present; (2) A complete falling away or complete apostasy and a re-emergence on American soil historically related to the Stone- Campbell Movement, (3) A complete falling away or complete apostasy of people but the church existed in the seed, the word of God.

Let’s explain and analyze the three points of view.

A. Uninterrupted Continuity

Muslims, the INC-1914, and the Church of Christ of the Latter Day Saints (Mormons) believe in the complete apostasy of the church that the Lord Jesus established in the first century. Muslims believe that God sent Muhammad as the last prophet in the 6th century. The INC-1914 preachers, on the other hand, believe in the apostasy of the first century church hence the re-emergence of the Iglesia ni Cristo in 1914 with Mr. Felix Manalo as God’s last messenger. Mormons also believe that the Church of Christ in the first century fell away so there’s a need for a new prophet – Joseph Smith.

Filipino apologists of Churches of Christ generally take the uninterrupted continuity of the church that Christ built but are hard pressed to produce historical records. One time this writer in a gospel meeting open forum was challenged to produce historical records or documents to prove the uninterrupted flow of Churches of Christ believers. Or show documents when Eusebio Tanicala was baptized, when my baptizer was baptized, and so on back to one of the apostles of the New Testament. In turning the table on the INC-1914 preacher, I countered, “Mr. RZ, I want you to produce historical records or birth certificates that you descended from Adam and Eve or else I will proclaim that you descended from monkeys.” The poor interrogator stopped asking questions.

Passages that we use to support this “uninterrupted continuity” are Daniel 2:44; Daniel 4:3; Daniel 4:34; Daniel 6:26: Daniel 7:14: Luke 1:33; Matthew 16:18; Romans 11:2-6; Ephesians 5:22-33; 1 Tim. 4:4; Hebrew 12:28; Revelation 12:4-6.

In submitting the above passages we understand that God would preserve a portion or a remnant of the faithful in all ages. If God promised to preserve and if He didn’t preserve the remnant, then God is a liar. But God cannot lie says Titus 1:2. Because God promised to preserve a remnant, we have to accept that item by faith. To demand a historical and evidentiary document is to show disbelief in the promise of God.

B. Complete Apostasy and Re-emergence on American Soil

Many American members of the Churches of Christ are inclined to this concept of apostasy and re-emergence of the Church via the American Restoration Movement. This group is confused because while they believe in complete apostasy yet it points to some historical markers in Massachusetts that some Puritan groups had congregations in the 1600s called “Church of Christ” who they also claim to be part of the Churches of Christ. But these congregations in the 1600s in the English colonies antedated the arrival of Alexander Campbell in September 1809 in New York. Tom Mapalo submitted to our blog a short article (from the Iloco magazine Bagnos of the 1970s) a historical document regarding this Massachusetts Puritan Church of Christ). This writer was the one who put that in the Iloco magazine which was a cover picture/caption of the magazine Firm Foundation. Dino A. Roldan has also submitted historical documents in our blog that prove that there were other groups outside the movement that sprang up from the preaching of Barton W. Stone as well as from the work of Thomas & Alexander Campbell. You could also check up the biography of Alexander Campbell and you’ll find that when he visited Scotland after moving to America in 1809, there were Churches of the same persuasion as he had. Which means that Alexander’s movement in America was not a “re-emergence of the church” from apostasy. They planted the seed in their hearts. They believed, obeyed, and practiced commandments and ordinances that Christ gave in the New Testament. These Americans became members of local congregations as were obedient people in Europe were members of local congregations of the universal church. Many continental Europeans continued on faithfully. Many people in Great Britain stayed close to the NT teachings so they were considered members of the universal church of Christ.

Some American church members believe in the story of Dr. Hans Grimm. (See the article under another title.) Dr. Hans Grimm who came from Central Europe says that his clan were members of a group that are nearly identical in beliefs and practices with those in the American Restoration Movement.

In view of the above observations the “re-emergence/restoration” view of some American brethren is not consistent. It should therefore be dropped.

C. The Church Exists in the Seed, the Word of God

Several American tract writers state that the church continues to exist as long as the seed, the word of God exists. They say that even if all disciples died as long as the seed, the gospel, the Bible does not disappear, the church is said to be existing. That when the seed, the gospel is preached in any century in any locality it produces the same church or disciples as was produced in the first century.

This explanation is, however, not persuasive. First, we define “church” as called out PEOPLE from the darkness of sin into the kingdom of Christ. So church is people. The seed, the Bible, is NOT church. Your Bible is not a church. An evangelistic sermon is not a church. The thousands of Bibles printed by the Philippine Bible Society stored in bodegas displayed in many bookstores are not thousand churches of Christ.

When we talk about the continuous existence of mango trees in the Philippines, we talk about TREES with roots, trunks, branches, twigs and leaves. Any Pinoy who insists that mango trees never stopped growing in the Philippines since it was first brought in and then argues regarding the presence of seeds as the same as the existence of mango trees is not a believable agriculture historian. A mango seed is NOT a mango tree.

I hope that this article is of help to our young preachers and church leaders.

Question on Amos 5:23

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Views on April 17, 2009 at 3:00 pm

By Eusebio Tanicala

Last April 10, I gave a lecture to a large crowd in Baguio City during the “Panagkakadua” (Fellowship) of Northern Luzon congregations. I insisted that Amos 5:21-24 does not prohibit the use of instrumental music in worship. I also told the brethren that Jack P. Lewis, a member of the Churches of Christ, and a well known scholar in the Old Testament, says that Amos 5 proves nothing about the use or non-use of instrumental music in worship.

During the open forum, a slip of paper was given to me with this question: “If Amos 5:23 is not a prohibition on the use of instruments of music, what does “I will not hear the melody of your stringed instruments mean?” The tone of the question was “is it not a prohibition?” I answered the question during the forum.

To my brethren and especially members of the PBC alumni association, please open your Bible to Amos 5:23. Please open your eyes and your mind. What is the first part of v. 23? It says, “Take away from Me the noise of your songs.” If v. 23 prohibits the use of stringed instruments, should not singing also be prohibited? But why do you sing in your worship time? Why do you sing in your birthday celebrations? Why do you sing during funeral services? Why apply prohibition on the second part of the verse but not in the first part of the verse. Come on, be true to yourself.

I repeat, Amos 5:21-23 is not talking about prohibition. I told the Baguio audience that the non-acceptance of the items enumerated is the employment of a figure of speech called “litotes” which means “relative negation.” This is the explanation of 1 Corinthians 1:17. Apostle Paul said that “he was not sent to baptize but to preach the gospel.” The Apostle Paul did not consider the non-essentiality of the act of baptism. He didn’t eliminate the command to baptize. He employed “litotes” which directs one to put to the side or reduce something and put to the center or magnify another which is more important.

In the case of the Corinthians, the converts were boasting and magnifying the names of the people who baptized them. As if their salvation were attached to the merits and popularity of the baptizers. So Apostle Paul “relatively negated” or put aside or reduced the importance of the baptizers so that he could put to the center or magnify the gospel of Christ (death, burial, resurrection) as the important thing in salvation. Which is why in another section of his letter to the Corinthians, the apostle Paul said, “I determine to know nothing except the cross of Christ.”

Please read Isaiah chapter 1 and Matthew chapter 23. The prophet Isaiah employed relative negation. So did our Lord Jesus.

The Israelites of Amos’ day were not accepted in their observance of their religious activities that were commanded through Moses because the people of Israel did not practice justice and righteousness (v.24). If justice and righteousness were practiced, then their religious duties could have been acceptable. Tithing the mint and anise and cumin could have been accepted among the Jews if the Jews practiced justice and mercy and faith. Wherefore Christ said, “These you ought to have done, without leaving the others undone.” (v. 23). Christ demands a balanced or a complete observance of all His commandments and all of our Christian duties.

“Form of God” — “Form of a Servant” (Phil. 2:6-7)

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Views on March 31, 2009 at 2:26 pm

By Eusebio Tanicala

There’s a faulty premising done by some preachers in analyzing Christ’s deity in Philippians 2:6-7. This faulty line of reasoning goes like this in a mock interpellation:

When Christ was in the form of a servant, was He truly a servant? (The expected answer is “Yes, He was a servant)
When Christ was in the form of God, was He truly God? (The expected answer is “Yes.” Of course the one who doesn’t believe in the deity of Christ will quibble at this point).
Conclusion: If Christ was truly a servant when he was in the form of a servant, then he was truly God when he was in the form of God.

But if I were asked the first question above, I would answer: “Form of a servant is not the same as servant.” This answer would block the progression of the interpellation. And I would add that the “form of God” is not the same as “God.”

This article explains the phrase “form of a servant” and “form of God.”

Firstly, in talking about Christ being God or deity, we mean possession of the essence or substance of deity or God. But the phrase “form of God” is different from “essence of God. “Form” refers to detachable or emptiable characteristics while “essence” or “substance” refer to undetachable attributes.From Phil. 2, we understand that Christ emptied Himself of that “form of God” which means that it is not talking about the “essence of God.”

“Form” in the context of Phil. 2:6-7 points to the honor, majesty and glittering splendor of the King of Kings in his royal palace. But a king could suspend or detach from himself the pomp and glitter of royalty and put on the humble appearance and clothing of an ordinary subject. Such is the story of Oedipus Rex in Greek mythology. Oedipus as an infant was abandoned by King Laius and Queen Jocasta of the city state of Thebes. Oedipus was picked up and raised by the king of Corinth. Many years passed and King Laius took off his crown and royal garment. He went hunting without his bodyguards. Now a young man, Oedipus was determined to search for his parents. Along a narrow path Laius and Oedipus met. Each felt royal blood running in his veins. Each presumed the other party to be an ordinary subject.

A duel ensued and the older one lost his life. Oedipus journeyed on and reached Thebes. Not knowing each other, Oedipus became greatly attracted to the widow Queen Jocasta and the two married. Years passed. Eventually the puzzle on the disappearance of King Laius led Oedipus to conclude that the man he killed on the narrow path was his own father. Filled with remorse that he killed his own father and married his own mother, Oedipus blinded himself and went into exile.

The point of the story here is that the glitter and majesty of royalty as in the case of King Laius and King Oedipus, could be set aside. But the essence of their humanity could not be discarded. King or beggar or greasy man, a human being remains human. Humanity is his essence. Once human, always a human.

Christ did an emptying act. He put aside the glitter of the King of Kings and became an ordinary, drab, rural Galilean. He had no photogenic features nor macho appeal. He was despised and rejected. See Isaiah 53:1-3. But Christ didn’t stop being God. He couldn’t discard his deity. Deity is His essence.

Secondly, “form of a servant” tells of appearances to or reputation in the estimation of others. It doesn’t point to essence of humanity. Servanthood is service and humility. Service and humility don’t empty a man of his humanity. Being a king, becoming a general or a manager, a driver, carpenter, farmer, carwasher, janitor, waiter, slave, prostitute – everyone remains equally human. A king could abdicate or be deposed. A general would eventually retire and become an ordinary citizen. But each remains human.

Servanthood was taken up by Christ. Servant of God in the salvation of mankind from the ruin of sin. Servant of humanity in suffering and dying in behalf of humanity. Servanthood was not inherent in the person and existence of Christ. It is not His essence. Christ, in the likeness of man, suffered and died to pay the penalty of sin. He fulfilled the demands of divine justice. The first Adam rebelled while the second Adam suffered the penalty. That was Christ’s servanthood.

After accomplishing His mission of paying the penalty for human rebellion, Christ emptied Himself of the form of a servant. Christ ascended back to heaven and took back upon Himself the privileges, splendor, and glitter of royalty. He sat at the right hand of God in the heavens. See. John 17:5; Rev. 1:9-20; 7:9-17.

Thirdly, since the first premise is based on the phrase “form of a servant” the focus is on the term form; consequently the second premise uses the term “form” in the phrase “form of God.” If the meaning of the first premise is admitted (that is “form of servant” means essence of a servant), then it follows that “form of God” means the essence of God. But the argument in the first premise is denied, hence the argument on the second premise is also denied.

Conclusion: Since “form of a servant” does not mean “essence of a servant” it follows that “form of God” doesn’t mean “essence of God.” Which means that Philippians 2:6-7 is not a direct proof that Christ possesses the essence of deity. Rather it is an indirect evidence of His deity.

Wrong Interpretation of Philippians 2:6-7 Analyzed

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Views on March 30, 2009 at 3:19 pm

By Eusebio Tanicala

Some Bible students, including several from Churches of Christ, interpret the phrase “form of God” to mean one and the same thing as “essence of God.” This is a wrong interpretation. I appeal that you rethink your position on this matter.

These same students further believe that the phrase “but emptied himself” to mean that Christ emptied himself of his “essence of God” or laid aside his Deity. This interpretation is wrong. I appeal that this position should be re-evaluated.

The above ideas are promoted by said Bible students and yet they believe at the same time that Christ possessed the essence of deity or was true God while He was on earth from his birth in Bethlehem until his death at the cross. In effect they are saying that Christ emptied himself of his deity but at the same time argue that Christ is full of deity. Such statement is simply contradictory. And some don’t see nor feel their obvious contradiction.

The right interpretation is to believe in the following items:

“Form of God” is not the same as the “essence of God” as much as a billowing smoke is not the same as the “flame of fire.” But the billowing smoke is a proof or effect of a big flame of fire. Only a person who has the essence of God can be in the form of God.
God cannot stop being God because God cannot cease to exist. He is eternal.
“Form of God” therefore refers to attributes of deity that are detachable or characteristics that could be suspended or switched off, diminished or intensified. God used to walk with Adam and Eve at the Garden of Eden which suggest that God could associate with humans in a pleasant, mellow presence as if walking in the park. God appeared to Abraham as an ordinary human in Genesis 18-19. God appeared to Moses in a burning bush and later as a thundering flame of fire in the giving of the Ten Commandments. And as a consuming fire in the case of Nadab and Abihu and in the contest on Mt. Carmel. As a rock in the wilderness according to 1 Cor. 10:4.
Don’t stick to the phrase “but emptied himself” of the American Standard Version but compare the rendition of the King James Version or New King James Version which reads “but he made himself of no reputation.” It is reputation, esteem, respect, and glorious appearance in the eyes of mankind. This idea agrees with John 17:5 and Philippians 2:9-11 – speaking of glorious presence and elevated honor before as well as after tabernacling with humankind on earth for 33 years.

A Sinner’s Prayer

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Views on March 7, 2009 at 5:30 am

Several years ago, while I was waiting for my turn into the doctor’s office in Baguio City, a visiting medical intern sat by me and we talked about salvation through the Lord Jesus Christ. This medical intern told me that it was easy to accept Jesus Christ into one’s life. She invited me to pray with her and she opened her notebook and read a paragraph of supplication for the forgiveness of sin and told me to believe in Jesus. Then she declared: “You are now saved.”

I told the young medical intern: “That’s not the process that our Bible tells us.” And she went away. My name was called and I went into the doctor’s office.

In connection with the Baguio City Flower Festival, a religious worker during the first week of March this year distributed religious tracts along Session Road. I was given this small tract which contains the following:

“God is good. He loves you! Welcome to the Panagbenga City on its Centennial Year. The Love of God is so great that He gave Himself for us. He speaks to us in so many ways and everything that happens to us is known to Him. Make this event special for you and God by accepting this gift of Salvation through Jesus Christ. (Acts 4:12) For all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God (Rom.3:23). Do not miss this chance, Jesus is knocking at the door of your heart and He wants to come into your life. (Rev. 3:20)

SAMPLE PRAYER: Lord Jesus, forgive me for my sins and cleanse my heart from every sin. Come into my heart and take control of my life. Thank you.

Then believe God’s promise that He has cleansed your heart from all your sins and has given you Eternal Life. (Jn 1:12; 1 Jn. 5:11-13).”

The religious group in which the tract distributor belongs to has invented the “Sinner’s Prayer” process and it eliminates water baptism. This religious group considers baptism a non-essential action. But being baptized in water is a COMMAND AND REQUIREMENT given by Jesus Christ. Being baptized in water is a believing and repentant sinner’s physical drama of the gospel: Christ’s death, Christ’s burial, Christ’s resurrection. See 1 Cor. 15:1-5.

Being baptized is a believer’s drama; it is an act of incorporating oneself into the authority domain of the Godhead; the Apostle Peter says it is for the forgiveness of sins; it is an act that incorporates a repentant sinner into the death of Christ; it is an act that incorporates a repentant sinner into the resurrection of Christ; it is an act of the believing sinner as a means of putting on Christ giving the image of a white robe washed by the blood of Christ; it is an answer of a clear conscience. See Mark 16:15-16; Matt. 28:18-20; Acts 2:38; Romans 6:1-6; Gal. 3:27; 1 Peter 3:20-21.

Our Lord Jesus Christ warned us of some blind teachers leading blind followers. A “Sample Prayer” is popularized by some religious teachers and yet they vehemently reject water baptism which is mentioned so many times in the New Testament. Let’s be careful on what we believe and follow. – Eusebio Tanicala

The Presence and Indwelling of the Holy Spirit

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Views on March 4, 2009 at 3:38 pm

(Series #02-09)

By Eusebio Tanicala

This year, I’ve written one article about the presence of the Holy Spirit. I’ve suggest that dividing into segments or epochs the time span of human awareness and Bible history might help clarify the issues under study. By reflecting on the Godhead (the Holy Spirit included) within the separate spheres of the different epochs we would have a wider sphere of understanding beyond the syntax and grammar of New Testament passages.

The main proposition that some Bible students affirm in this study is: “That the Holy Spirit indwells (influences, guides) the Christian through the mediation of the word (Bible) only.”

In a question form these same group asks: “What can the Holy Spirit do that the word can’t do?”

The proposition above means that the Holy Spirit (in effect God or deity) influences or guides Christians (in effect the whole cosmos) through the word only. This idea I deny.

The question above means that what the Holy Spirit can do, the word of God in the Bible can also do. In view of this belief they hold, there’s no need to call for the personal influence or guidance of the Holy Spirit because the inspired word has been delivered to mankind. This idea I also deny.

In the first article I wrote this year, we limited our thoughts within the period when what was in existence was deity or God. This Epoch #A covers from the unfathomable eternal past up to the point when spiritual dominions and powers or angelic hosts were created.

Within this period, several questions come out which we must seriously consider:

During this period of Epoch #A, when what only existed is Deity or God, how big was God and what corner and point in cosmic space and in the heavens was God not found?
During this period of Epoch #A, did the three persons of the Godhead communicate through the words written in the Bible or through telepathy?
During this period of Epoch #A, the three persons of the Godhead were in complete harmony and complete unity, is it not true that where the Father was, the Second Person was also there and the Third Person was also there?
During this period of Epoch #A, did the Holy Spirit influence or guide without the word or the Bible?
The Holy Spirit existed during the period covered by Epoch #A and the Holy Spirit has mind today to go back into that epoch, did the Bible exist during that period of Epoch A and does the Bible possess mind that could go back and remember that period before the creation of the angelic hosts?

Your answers to the five questions above will make clear your position on the proposition and question submitted above.

It is clear that long before humanity was created and long before the Bible was written and long before God spoke anything in the physical universe as recorded in Genesis 1, God has acted and willed of His own. That means that God existed and willed of His own before anything was spoken in Genesis 1:1. Which means that Deity or God exists and wills beyond and outside of the oral or written word of the Bible. It means that God or the Godhead (Holy Spirit included) exists and wills beyond and outside the oral or written word of the Bible.#

(Note: A sequel to this article is forthcoming. ET)

King Solomon’s Gold Collection Roughly Estimated in Volume

In Bible Study Lessons, Features on February 27, 2009 at 11:25 pm

By Eusebio Tanicala

The Philippine Bible Society wants to make the present generation feel the weight and volumes that are used in olden times by employing currently understood measures. There are several places in the Bible where wealth is expressed in “talents.” However, many Bible students think that “talent” is ability. But “talent” is a weight measure. And there is the “long” or “royal” talent which was about double the “short” or “ordinary” talent.

In the later Philippine dialect translations, the Philippine Bible Society instructed tribal linguists to use the metric weight measure. Instead of “talent” the weight measure of “ton” is used.

In this article, the writer endeavors to roughly calculate the gold and silver collections of King Solomon by using the record of the Iloco Bible where “ton” is employed. A metric ton is 1000 kilograms (kilos). A kilogram is 2.20 ounces (oz.)

If some are interested to make monetary computations, the price of gold in the world market in the third week of February 2009 was more than $1000 per ounce. This report was made by Reuters correspondents from New York and London which appeared in the Business Section of The Philippine Star (Feb. 22): “Gold rose above $1000 an ounce on Friday for the first time since March last year as nervous investors piled into the yellow metal to preserve wealth amid a tumbling stock market.”

Now let’s notice passages where Solomon’s gold and silver are mentioned. “The king made silver and gold as common in Jerusalem as stones.” (see 2 Chron. 1:16 & 1 Kings 10:27) Indeed, Solomon’s time was the golden era of Israel. I may have missed other verses where gold and silver are recorded that were owned by Solomon. But the following will suffice to demonstrate the great collection of the Rich Man.

a) 1 Chron. 22:14- Gold stockpiled by David was 4,000 tons = 4,000,000 kilos = 8,800,000 ounces.
b) 1 Chron.22:14 -King David’s silver was 40,000 tons = 40,000,000 kilos = 88,000,000 ounces.
c) 1 Chron.29:4 -Finest gold from David was 115 tons = 115,000 kilos = 583,000 ounces.
d) 1 Chron. 29:4 -Pure silver from King David was 265 tons = 265,000 kilos = 418,000 ounces.
e) 1 Chron.29:7-Gold from officials was 190 tons or 190,000 kilos or 418 ounces.
f) 1 Chron.29:7- Silver from officers was 380 tons or 380,000 kilos or 836,000 ounces.
g) 1 Kings 10:22- Gold and silver every three year voyage of commercial ships. Solomon ruled forty years so that allows about 12 voyages. If the gold-silver volume is approximately that of 1 Kings 9:28 of 16 tons x 12 = 192 tons or 192,000 kilos or 422,400 ounces.
h) 1 Kings 9:11, 14- Gold was 5 tons or 5,000 kilos = 11,000 ounces.
i) 1 Kings 9:28- Gold was 16 tons or 16,000 kilos=35,200 ounces.
j) 1 Kings 10:10- Gold was 5 tones or 5,000 kilos or 11,000 ounces.
k) 1 Kings 10:14- Gold was 25 tons yearly for 40 years = 1000 tons = 1,000,000 kilos or 220,000,000 ounces.
l) 1 Kings 10:15- Granting that 25 tons of gold come from other sources annually x 40 year reign = 1000 tons = 1,000,000 kilos or 20,000,000 ounces.
m) 1 Kings 10:22- Granting that we have 16 tons as in 1 Kings 9:28 from this source, this is 16,000 kilos or 35,200 ounces.

The above is the best estimate I could make from my reading of the accounts in the historical books. I hope that this will make you feel how wealthy Solomon was, however, the verdict on this Rich Man is found in 1 Kings 11:9, “So the LORD became angry with Solomon, because his heart had turned from the LORD God of Israel, who appeared to him twice.” #

The Law of Specifity and The Law of Exclusion among Churches of Christ

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Views on February 18, 2009 at 5:22 am

By Eusebio Tanicala

The Law of Specifity supports the rule of “Go Back to the Bible” and the Restoration Movement’s slogan, “Speak where the Bible speaks and be silent where it is silent.” The “Law of Specifity” means that what is specified is what the Lawgiver wants to be followed. To subtract from it, or to add to it or to substitute it with another item insults the Lawgiver especially if the Lawgiver is the Creator God, the all-wise God, the all-knowing God, the all-powerful God, the God who is the Judge of the Universe.

Related to this law is The Law of Exclusion which means that what is specified necessarily excludes any other item in the same category. When the Philippine constitution specifies that a President, a Vice President and 24 senators are the national government officials to be elected, the specific law necessarily excludes electing a King or electing a Queen.

The Law of Specifity and the Law of Exclusion are based on the axiom of logic which states: Expresso unius excluso alterius. Roughly translated it reads, “That which is expressed excludes any alteration.”

Among mainstream Churches of Christ, building Noah’s ark is a good example in biblical interpretation. We submit that the gopher wood material is specific and to substitute it with another kind of wood would have been unacceptable. The boat’s measurement was specified. To change the dimension would have been unacceptable. The Book of Leviticus specifies several kinds of sacrifices and offerings. Altering the specified kind of animals and altering the prescribed offering procedures would have been unacceptable. Do you think any Hebrew or priest had the audacity to change what Yahweh prescribed? Did not the prophet Malachi condemn the priests who did not follow the prescriptions about the tithes? An expressed prohibitory statement is not needed to define limitations.

Among Churches of Christ, the specified basis for divorce is fornication in Matthew 19:3-12. There’s general agreement that what is specified remains the exclusive basis for scriptural divorce. An expressed prohibitory statement saying, “Snoring during sleep shall not be a basis for divorce” is not needed.

Among Churches of Christ, the specified elements of the Lord’s Supper are bread and fruit of the vine. We oppose the Roman Catholic Church’s decision of withholding the cup from the people because such doctrine destroys the authority of Christ. All serious Bible students oppose the introduction of fried chicken, lechon, pizza, bibingka, pineapple juice in the Lord’s Supper because we all believe that what is specified would exclude other items in the same category.

Among Churches of Christ, we believe that Ephesians 5:18-19 “singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord;” Colossians 3:16 “singing with grace in your heart to the Lord;” Hebrew 2:12 “in the midst of the congregation will I praise your name;” and James 5:13 “Is any cheerful? Let him sing praise” (ASV quotations) specify the instrument in making the music of Christian worship: the heart or the spiritual person. Adding the mechanical instrument of music we abhor because we believe in the validity of The Law of Specifity and The Law of Exclusion.

When we in the Churches of Christ interpret the woman’s veil or else her head be shorn in 1 Cor. 11:4-6, we should be consistent in the application of The Law of Specifity and The Law of Exclusion. During the time of the Apostle Paul, the two areas or two activities that were specified when a woman should wear veil are “praying” or “prophesying.” But among Churches of Christ there are five identified worship activities: Praying, Singing, Listening to the Exhortation (Sermon-Bible Exposition), Participating in the Lord’s Supper, Collecting contribution from the members.

To be consistent in applying the two laws cited above, we should agree that there were only two areas when a woman in Paul’s time was to wear veil: when praying or prophesying. Not in other activities.

Also to be consistent in applying the two laws cited above, we should recognize that the specific voice of the two verbs “praying” or “prophesying” is in the active voice. Meaning, a woman had to actually do the act of “praying” or “prophesying” to feel obligated to wear the veil.

To require a woman to veil herself while she listens to the lesson presented by a male teacher during the Bible Study hour or during the sermon which is delivered by a male preacher is to violate the two Laws cited above. To require a woman to veil herself in other areas of church worship would be violative of 1 Cor. 4:6 warning in “not to go beyond what is written” or Revelations’ warning not to add to nor subtract from what is written.

The appeal here is to observe the two Laws cited above or else there would be no limitations in religious activities. Also observe consistency in the application of hermeneutical dogmas so that what is applicable in one area should also be applicable in other areas given the same situation.

(In another article we shall explain that the acts of “praying” or prophesying” among women have expired with the cessation of the miraculous and direct operation of the Holy Spirit in distribution spiritual gifts)

WEAK ARGUMENT – CONJUNCTION “AND”

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Views on February 12, 2009 at 4:24 pm

I have heard a fellow preacher use in a public debate the conjunction “and” found in John 17:3 as proof in arguing for the deity of Christ. His line of reasoning is “that the conjunction ‘and’ connects two terms of equal rank.” He explained that thee are two persons named in the passage: the Father and Jesus Christ; that the Father is true God and it follows that the Son is also true God because the two are jointly mentioned and are connected by the conjunction “and.”

The explanation of our fellow preacher is confusing and is weak. First, the grammatical rule of the conjunction “and” refers to connecting or joining two “clauses of equal rank.” The conjunction “and” is used to connect or join two independent clauses. The two clauses should be both independent clauses, the same rank as clauses. This conjunction “and” should not be used to connect an independent clause to a dependent clause.

The “equal rank” refers to the rank of the clause. Not the rank or position or title or office or honor held by a persona.

I strongly appeal to Bible College teachers and older preachers to stop the above argument based on John 17:3 using the conjunction “and” as proof of Christ’s deity.
The argument is wrong. – E. Tanicala

13 Steps to a Better Understanding Why the Use of Mechanical Instruments of Music in Christian Worship Lacks New Testament Authority

In Bible Study Lessons, Features on January 29, 2009 at 5:35 am

Step #1. Know that Amos 5:21-23 and Amos 6:3-7 Don’t Prohibit the Use of Musical Instruments among the Israelites

a) Previous generations were taught that these passages are the most direct and most potent argument against the use of mechanical instruments, but proper interpretation tells us that prohibition of musical instruments is not the message of the Book of Amos. A false argument proves nothing.

b) Amos condemned the injustice and lack of faith in Yahweh that prevailed in the nation in the midst of external religious activities which showed the hypocrisy of the Israelites. It’s the same hypocrisy in Isaiah 1 and Matthew 23.

c) Amos 5:23 negates singing as well as stringed instruments, but why prohibit only the latter? To condemn musical instruments based on this passage automatically condemns singing.

Step #2. Know that King David Was not the First to Use (discover and originate) Musical Instruments
a) “Invent” (chasab in Heb) in Amos 6:5 means “to design” (Young’s Analytical Concordance, page 519) just as architects today design houses but they don’t discover and bring out for the first time the use of houses.

b) Genesis 4:21 tells us that the first users of harps and flutes were Jubal and his sons who lived thousands of years before David became king in the year 1010 B.C.

c) Jacob went to Haran in the year 1929 B.C. and his father-in-law already chanted songs to the sound of timbrel and harp. See Gen. 31:27. Miriam, Moses’ sister, and the Israelite women, danced to the sound of instruments after the miraculous crossing of the Red Sea which happened about 500 years before David was born. See Genesis 15.

d) All of the above prove that King David didn’t originate the use of musical instruments in worship.

Step #3. Know that the Use of Musical Instruments in Israel’s Religious Activities during the Mosaical Dispensation Was Commanded by Yahweh the True God

a) The priests, thro Moses, were commanded to make trumpets for religious services. See Num. 29:1-6; Lev.23:23-25; 25:29.

b) King David’s producing instruments of music for the tabernacle worship was a command of Yahweh, the true God, through the palace prophets Nathan and Gad. See 2 Chronicles 29:25.

c) Read 2 Chronicles 30:1-27. Specifically v. 21, “…the Levites and the priests praised the LORD day by day, singing to the LORD, accompanied by loud instruments.” And v. 27, “The priests, the Levites, arose and blessed the people, and their voice was heard; and their prayer came up to His holy dwelling place, to heaven.” These passages tell us that during the Mosaical dispensation, God accepted mechanical instruments in worship and praise.

d) In view of the above, it is wrong to claim that musical instruments in worship is sinful from the very beginning of time.

Step #4. Know the Attributes of the God We Worship to Create in Us Awe, deep Respect, godly Fear, and Obedience

a) God is the Creator and maintainer of the Universe

b) God is immense, awesome, glorious, majestic, omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient.

c) God is Judge at the last day when all men give account of their obedience or disobedience.

d) Capture the worshipful attitude of those surrounding the throne of God in the Book of Revelation.

e) Honor, respect, be in awe, and pay reverence to the God we serve.

f) Observe decorum and protocol in your worship of God for He demands such in John 4:24.

Step #5. Know that there Are Three Dispensations with Different Modes of Worship

a) Patriarchal: worship was mainly through burnt animal sacrifices on stone altars and by prayers.

b) Mosaical: worship acts are defined in the books of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers & Deuteronomy.

c) Christian: worship was defined by Christ in John 4:24 in a general sense and the specifics are found in the gospels and New Testament books. There’s no mention of mechanical instruments of music in the church worship in apostolic times.

Step #6. Know the Evolution of the Synagogue Worship which provided the Background for many Church’s Practices

a) During the United Kingdom, the center of worship was the Tabernacle with animal offerings mediated by the priests and the giving the tithes of farm produce, the weekly Sabbath rest of staying in their abodes plus the annual feasts; during the Divided Kingdom, the center of worship was the temple

b) During the Captivity Period and after, worship evolved: Weekly gathering in local places called the synagogue; Scripture reading in the synagogue; Exhortation or sermon; Reading of Doxologies; Prayers, and Singing. Mechanical instruments of music were not employed in the synagogue worship. You may check these up in Edersheim’s book, “Life and Times of Jesus Christ.”

Step #7. Know the New Testament Passages that Specify the Kind of Music Stated for the Church

James 5:13; Ephesians 5:19; Colossians 3:16; 1 Cor. 14:15 Romans 15:9; Hebrews 2:12. There’s no generic term “make music to the Lord” but the specific act in the NT is “vocal music” which sing with your heart.

Step #8. Know the New Testament Greek Lexical Meaning of the Word Psallo & Psalmos

a) Notice the evolution of the verb psallo which has its root from psao which meant “to rub, to wipe; to handle, to touch” without music attached to the word. Note the different stages and changes of meaning of the word: (Stage 1) “To pluck off; to pull out.” Note that music is still out of the meaning. (Stage 2) “to cause to vibrate by touching, to twang, to touch or to strike the chord, to twang the strings of musical instruments so that they gently vibrate” Note that vibration, an association with pleasing sound now comes out. (Stage 3) “to play on a stringed instrument, to play the harp.” Note that the meaning is entirely on the music produced by the physical instrument and singing is excluded. (Stage 4) “To sing to the music of the harp” Note that the two acts go together at this stage: vocal and instrumental. (Stage 5) “In the N.T. to sing a hymn, to celebrate the praises of God in song, James 5:13 (R.V. sing praise; … in honor of God, Eph. 5:19 (here A.V. making melody); Romans 15:9, psallo to pneumatic, psalo de kai to noi – I will sing God’s praises indeed with my whole soul stirred and borne away by the Holy Spirit, but I will also follow reason as my guide, so that what I sing may be understood alike by myself and by the listeners, 1 Cor. 14:15.” Note: The mechanical instrument is now dropped off from the meaning at this stage; singing became the only activity meant in the word. (See Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon, page 675)
b) Psalmos, meant “a striking, twanging , specifically a striking the chords of a musical instrument; hence a pious song, a psalm, Ephesians 5:19; Col. 3:16.” (See Thayer’s Lexicon, same page) Note that the “musical instrument” is not material, but the heart because the meaning now is simply “a pious song, a psalm.”

My explanation: Since the direct object of the action verb mentioned in Eph. 5:19 & Col. 3:16 is the heart, the musical instrument is the human heart; not any mechanical instrument like organ, guitar or trumpet. The longing of the human heart is expressed by singing, the fruit of the lips.

Step #9. Know the Typology of the Bible that Points to an Evolution from the Physical to the Spiritual Realm

Hebrews 10:1-3 teaches us the existence of shadows or types or representations and the antitypes or realities. The Mosaical Law was a teacher that led the Jews to Christ’s Law, the New Testament, which means there’s a change. Note some of the shadows and their realities:

a) OT Passover was a lamb or a goat, but NT Passover is Christ.

b) Day of Atonement to bring away Israel’s sins was a escape goat, but NT escape goat is Christ.

c) OT high priest came from Aaron’s family, but NT high priest is Christ from the tribe of Judah.

d) OT temple was a physical building, but NT temple is the church and individual bodies.

e) Israel’s goal was to reach the promised land of Canaan, but NT goal is heaven.

f) OT music included material musical instruments; but NT specifies the heart/lips.

g) To include in the NT worship the mechanical music maker of the OT is the same as going back to the OT Passover lamb, OT escape goat, OT high priest, OT temple, etc.

Step #10. Know the Early Historical Testimonies on Church Music

You may refer to the two articles of our brother Jack P. Lewis “Music and the Church Fathers” page 14 and “Music in Worship During the Reformation” page 16 of TRUTH FOR TODAY, March 2008. He quotes from historical books which give evidence that vocal music was the practice of early centuries. See also Marshall Clement Kurfees’ book “Instrumental Music in the Worship” and Guy Caskey’s booklet on the same subject.

Step #11. Know how to Use the Authority Diagram to Determine Biblical Acceptance

This is exemplified by J.D. Thomas’ diagram.

Step #12. Know how to Explain the Law of Specifics and Law of Exclusion on Religious Matters

a) The Law of Specifics could be stated like this: “Where an item of faith or religious practice is specifically authorized in a NT passage and no other item of the same level in the NT amends it in another passage, the specified item becomes exclusive. Example: Issue on divorce in Matt. 19:1-10. Are we free to add any other grounds?

b) Examples: (1) Mark 16:15-16 state that belief and baptism are items related to forgiveness of sins; but Acts 2:38 amends and adds repentance; Acts 22:16 further adds “calling on his name” as another item on the same level; therefore, all these should be taken together as acts required by God for the forgiveness of an alien sinner. On the other hand (2) Christ is mentioned as the “only begotten Son of God” – since there’s no one else mentioned in the NT as begotten Son of God, Christ remains to be believed as the exclusive Son of God and nobody else.

c) This is the case of “Singing” as the specified music in the church that becomes exclusive.

Step #13. Know the Danger of the expression “Anything not expressly prohibited in the New Testament, that thing is allowed.”

a) This statement would give liberty to every Bible teacher and religious leader to introduce any kind of belief and practice that is not expressly prohibited in the New Testament. Following have no expressed prohibition in the NT: Withholding the cup from the laity in RCC Lord’s Supper; canonized saints serving as mediators; the Pope as head of a universal church; the pope as the vicar of Christ on earth; Purgatory as an intermediate state of the dead; Limbo as an intermediate state of innocent dead children but non-Roman Catholics call these beliefs as errors because they are not found in the NT. Also claiming Muhammad as the last prophet, believing in Felix Manalo as the last messenger of God,
allowing Joseph Smith to add to the Bible the Book of Mormon as a basis of religious beliefs are not acceptable because they are not found in the Bible. Sprinkling as a form of baptism, having a special priesthood in the church, having cardinals as officers of the church are digressions because these are not in the NT.

b) What forbids me as a religious leader to add the following items to the Lord’s Supper observance: pizza, coke in can for each participant, fried chicken, etc.?

c) The above expression destroys the basic presumption of the Reformation Movement: “Sola Scriptura” and also contradicts the starting principle of the Restoration Movement: “Speak where the Bible speaks; be silent where the Bible is silent.”

d) Further, it destroys the authority of Christ recorded in John 12:42-50; 1 Cor. 4:6-7; Matt. 7:21-23.

e) Therefore, the expression “Anything not expressly prohibited in the New Testament, that thing is allowed” is dangerous and should be avoided as a principle in Biblical Interpretation.

(Note: I will give a more detailed discussion during the Northern Luzon Churches of Christ fellowship on April 10, 2009 in Baguio City.)

WRONG PREACHERS’ ARGUMENTS VERSUS JEHOVAH’S WITNESSES

In Bible Study Lessons, Features on January 9, 2009 at 4:13 pm

By Eusebio Tanicala

Since 1960 when I first attended classes at Philippine Bible College, I have heard students and preachers using the argument that “a witness is one who has personally seen somebody or personally heard something that he testifies about.” Evidently the students and young preachers of that period have invented this superficial definition of the term “witness” which they employed in discussions against the Jehovah’s Witnesses. I have never accepted that superficial definition of the term “witness.”

Many of our preachers when confronting “Jehovah’s Witnesses” ask the question: “A witness is one who has seen something or somebody, have you ever personally seen Jehovah that you witness for Him?”

After almost fifty years, the above ignorantly framed and wrongly premised question is still used by some preachers. Because I feel that the argument or question framed is wrong, I write this article so that educated Jehovah’s Witnesses won’t sneer at our preachers. And I hope our preachers would stop using wrong arguments.

Lately, a preacher excitedly related to me how he silenced a group of “Jehovah’s Witnesses.” He told me that he asked the question: “A witness is one who has seen what he testifies about, have you ever seen Jehovah that you say you are a witness of Jehovah?” Since the group did not answer him back, our preacher felt he had silenced these people. He felt victorious.

Question: Is it true that the term “witness” necessarily refer to one who has personally seen the one he witness about?
Answer: No, it is not true that a “witness” is one who has seen the person he bears testimony of or gives witness about.

The Old English form of the word is “witness” which meant knowledge or testimony. And in the Old English language a person who has knowledge or testimony was called a witnesser. So the argument that a witness should have personally seen or has personally heard of that which he testifies of is not correct. In view of this, I appeal to my preaching brethren to stop using a wrong definition and wrong argument.

Funk & Wagnall’s Standard Dictionary, Vol. 2, page 1446 says about the term witness, “1. A person who has seen or knows something; 2. In law, one who has knowledge of facts relating to a given cause and is subpoenaed to testify.” I challenge doubters to check up with knowledgeable lawyers how they define the term witness. Ask them if seeing is an essential requisite of one to be a witness.

From the dictionary definition, one could witness based on his knowledge. Witnessing is not based only on the act of seeing.

In the Bible the term witness may mean testimony or one who gives a testimony. It may mean martyr or one who is passionate about a cause or an idea. Many of the passages in the New Testament that are translated “witness” come from the Greek words or derivatives of martus, marturia, and marturion. Please check up your Strong Bible Concordance on page 1064.

Now I submit passages (NKJV) where the term “witness” are found which refer to inanimate objects or no-person entities. Such passages tell us that “seeing” is not always the basis of true witnessing.

Genesis 21:30 says that seven ewe lambs are called witnesses
Genesis 31:44 points to a covenant as a witness; 31:48, 52 point to a heap of stones as a witness
Deut. 4:26 says that heaven and earth are witnesses
Deut 31:19 & 21 a song serves as a witness
Joshua 22:26,27 & 34 tell us that an altar is a witness
Job 16:8-9 points to a shriveled face as a witness.
Our Lord says in Matt. 24:14 that the gospel after it has been preached into all the world would be a witness to the coming of the end of the world
John 5:36 & 10:35 record that works are called witnesses
James 5:3 tells us that rust or corrosion of metal money is also called a witness
Conscience is called a witness in Romans 9:1.

The above verses should be sufficient to prove that a “witness” is not necessarily one who has seen somebody or something.

Brethren, the strength of one’s argument should be based on the truth and correctness of one’s premises and not based on the ignorance of the unschooled rural Jehovah’s Witnesses. Let us not bluff the ignorant people by our ignorance.

Indwelling, Presence of the Holy Spirit

Indwelling/Presence of the Holy Spirit

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Views on December 3, 2008 at 1:39 am

By Eusebio Tanicala

Some Bible students believe that the Holy Spirit in person dwells or is present in the Christian. Others think that the Holy Spirit dwells or influences the Christian through the word (Bible) only.

The one who believes that the Holy Spirit dwells or influences the Christian through the word only presents this syllogism to the other party:
1. If you believe that the Holy Spirit dwells in you, that indwelling would make you God;
2. Since you haven’t become God, therefore, the Holy Spirit doesn’t dwell in you.

A fellow preacher asked me to comment on the above line of reasoning. My impression on the above line of reasoning follows.

Nowhere in the Bible does it teach that when the Holy Spirit dwells or is present in a person or in a place that the person or place becomes God. If that were true, then the heavens where God dwells should have become God long time ago.

To further test the veracity of the line of reasoning of those who think that Holy Spirit indwelling would make an indwelt person deity let’s pose some questions:

God dwells in heaven, has heaven become God? Answer: No.
God sits on the throne in heaven, has God’s throne become God? Answer: No.
The “thro the word” advocate we may call Mr. Woods, dwells in his house, has his house become Mr. Woods? Answer: No.
Abram dwelt in the land of Canaan (Gen. 13:12), has the land of Canaan become Abram?
God dwells between the cherubim (2 Kings 19:15), does the space between the cherubim turn into God? Answer: No.
God dwells in Zion (Psalm 9:11), has Zion become God? Answer: No.
God dwells in Mt. Zion (Isa. 8:18), has Mt. Zion become God? Answer: No.
The Spirit of the LORD came upon Othniel (Judges 3:9-10), did Othniel become God?
The Spirit of the LORD came upon Saul (1 Sam. 10:6, 10) after he was anointed, did Saul become God? Answer: No.
The Holy Spirit came upon Mary (Luke 1:35 and context), did Mary become God?
The Holy Spirit descended upon Christ on the day of His baptism (Matt. 3:16; John 1:33), did this descent of the HS upon Christ turned Him into God? Answer: No.

Since our answers to the above questions are all “No” the premises and conclusion of the “word only” advocates should therefore be false.

Holy Spirit Presence, Supernatural Powers

Holy Spirit Presence and Supernatural Powers

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Views on November 30, 2008 at 1:39 am

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. #

Diety, Godhead, trinity, tritheism

Attributes & Characteristics of Deity

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Views on November 24, 2008 at 3:58 pm

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.” #

divorce, musical instruments in worship

Tolerated but not Permitted?

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Views on November 23, 2008 at 7:36 am

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:

A God-arranged or ideal marriage as in the case of Adam and Eve was a “till death do the couple part.”
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.
God was not pleased with the divorce decree, He didn’t permit it but merely tolerated its practice.
But now in the NT, divorce is prohibited in the church.
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

Godhead, Holy Trinity, One, tritheism, Unitarianism

Higher Meaning of the Word “One”

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Views on November 21, 2008 at 3:49 pm

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. ##

CARDINAL number, Godhead, Holy Trinity, One, tritheism, Unitarianism

Dictionary Definition of Cardinal Numeral “One”

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Views on November 19, 2008 at 3:43 pm

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)

God, mathematical bluff, monotheism, Theological Mathematics, trinity, tritheism

1 Divided by 1 Divided by 1 = Ignorance

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Views on November 17, 2008 at 3:37 pm

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) ###

Apologists, Diety, Holy Trinity, tritheism, Unitarianism

1 x 1 x 1 = Tritheism

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Views on November 14, 2008 at 3:37 pm

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)

Glory and Honor before Creation

Glory and Honor before Creation (Part VI)

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Views on November 1, 2008 at 4:47 pm

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.

Christ’s Persona before Incarnation

Has Movements – A Persona or a Promised Idea? (Part V)

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Views on October 30, 2008 at 3:19 pm

Christ’s Persona before Incarnation (Series 5)

By Eusebio Tanicala, Ph.D.

This article deals with movements or actions. With each action or movement or attribute mentioned in a passage, ask yourself the question: “Is this a persona or an idea I read about in his verse?”

OBJECTIVE
After reflecting on this series #5, you should be able to reason out that it is more logical to think of a persona making movements or actions and not a promised idea.

Hebrew 1:10-13; Psalm 90:2; John 1:1-3; Colossians 1:16-17 – Passages declaring that Christ in His spirit persona was the Creator of the invisible and visible dominions and powers and principalities. Can the act of creating be assigned to a promised idea?

Micah 5:2 foretells the birth place of the Messiah in Bethlehem which is fulfilled in Matt. 2 and Luke 2 but makes additional information about previous movements prior to the incarnation of that Messiah and says, “Whose goings forth are from of old, from everlasting.” The spirit persona of the Messiah has existed and has moved from the everlasting, eternal past. The term “whose” properly refers to a persona not to a concept or promised idea.

John 3:16; 5:30; John 6:29,29, 57; John 7:16, 33; John 8:18, 29; John 17:3, 21, 23, 25 — All declare the sending of the Son by the Father. Where was Christ and when was He commissioned and sent out by the Father to save the sinful world? Was He in heaven before His incarnation? Was He in Judea in 30 A.D.? To this writer, it’s more logical to think that He was a persona in the spirit with the Father in Heaven before His incarnation. And we could not think of sending and commissioning an idea or concept.

John 3:31; 8:23 – Give testimonies to us about Christ being from above in Heaven and not from earth below.

John 8:42; 16:27 & 17:8– tell us of Christ’s consciousness of having proceeded or having come from the Father. The personal pronoun “I” should make us feel that Christ was a persona while in Heaven.

John 6:33, 35, 38, 41, 51 – Christ says he came from above, from heaven. While Jesus was alive on earth he made this interesting statement: “No one has ascended to heaven but He who came down from heaven, that is, the Son of Man *who is in heaven.” (John 3:13) The act of descending comes first than the act of ascending which suggest that His existence in heaven is prior to His presence on earth. To think of a persona that descends from heaven is more logical than having an idea that descend from heaven to earth. Please read the other passages.

John 10:36, “… do you say of Him whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, ‘You are blaspheming,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’? The phrase “sent into the world” suggests a person that exists outside of the world and he enters into the world.

John 16:27-28 tells us the movement of a persona, “I came forth from the Father and have come into the world. Again, I leave the world and go to the Father.” Usage of a personal pronoun and his movements suggest the presence of a persona that came forth from the Father and who returned to the Father.

John 6:62, “What then if you should see the Son of Man ascend where He was before?” This was stated while Christ was one earth in 29 A.D. And the disciples witnessed this in Acts 1:9-11.

John 13:3, “Jesus… He had come from God and was going to God.” John 16:16, “I go to the Father” 27, “I go to the Father” 28, “I … have come into the world…I leave the world and go to the Father.”John 17:11, part of Jesus’ farewell prayer says, “ … I come to You … Holy Father…” 13, “…I come to You…” John 20:17, “… I am ascending to My Father…”

The above verses give us the conclusion that there was a spirit persona that descended from Heaven, and that same spirit persona was the one that back to Heaven. The mystery is that the spirit persona fused with humanity. Our Lord Jesus Christ is one persona with two nature or essence in Him: deity and humanity. This fusion of two natures we could not fathom but we have to accept it by faith. Someday we shall understand.

History, Iglesia ni Cristo, World War I

INC Registration and World War I Outbreak

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Views on October 30, 2008 at 2:30 pm

One blog visitor asked the following question in reaction to our lesson on Revelation 7:1-3 in a previous posting: “Kailan po nagdeklara ng digmaan ang Austria-Hungary sa Serbia? Nabasa ko po sa world history na July inideklara ng Austria ang digmaan. Meron ba itong kaugnayan sa Iglesia ni Cristo? Please po ibigay ninyo ang eksaktong petsa…”–Reggie A Samonte

Ang pagdeklara ng Austria-Hungary ng pakikidigma laban sa Serbia ay walang kaugnayan sa petsa ng pagkarehistro ng Iglesia ni Cristo. Guniguni lamang ng mga apologists ng INC na mayroon kaugnayan ng petsa ng INC registration na July 27, 1914 sa declaration of war noong 1914. I have a history major in my college course, so I have a background in world history. According to history books, the Balkan region had military conflicts in 1912-1913. As early as 1913, Germany had assured Austria-Hungary of military help should war break out again. While Archduke Francis Ferdinand, next in succession to the Austro-Hungarian throne, was inspecting military installations in the city of Sarajevo, he and his wife Sofia were assassinated on June 28, 1914 at 11:15 A.M. by Serbian militants under Colonel Dragutin Dimitrijevic.

On July 19, 1914 Austro-Hungarian authorities approved a plan to humiliate Serbia, home of the assassins. On July 23, 1914 the ultimatum which contained several conditions was delivered by Austria against Serbia which included punishment of the assassins. But there were two conditions which involved some kind of sovereignty issues that were difficult to accept so there was some reluctance on the part of Serbia.

July 27, 1914 Emperor Wilhelm II of Germany told Austria that war was not necessary over the issue of assassination. However, on that same date, Austrian Foreign Minister Berchtold had convinced Emperor Joseph Francis to declare war against Serbia. So a declaration of war by the Austro-Hungarian empire was issued on July 28, 1914 and the Austro-Hungarian military started bombardment of the capital city of Belgrade on July 29, 1914.

The above is the historical flow of events that ignited the military conflict which started World War I. You can check these facts from The New Encyclopedia Britannica Vol 29, (1991), pp. 961-963. Other sources could be as factual as my reference.

Now, you should read Revelation 6:12-17. I don’t believe that this is World War I. Our Iglesia ni Cristo friends, however, claim that this is a description of World War I artillery and aerial bombardments which created panic among the people who sought refuge in air raid shelters. So the war of Rev. 6:12-17 should now be over as you read Rev. 7:1 with the declaration, “After these things” which are the horrific sceneries of Revelation 6:12-17.

But notice Revelation 7:1-3. There are four angels tasked to prevent the wind of destruction with the order not to let loose or not to allow military conflict to break out.By lumping together Rev. 6:12-17 and Rev. 7:1-3 as the First World War, the INC inverts chronology with this view: the war takes place and ends and then talk about the war not to break out but still it broke out. Confusing indeed.

And the four angels, according to our INC apologists, were Prime Ministers Orlando of Italy, Clemenceau of France and Lloyd George of Great Britain and President Wilson of the United States of America who came together at Armistice Day of November 11, 1918 to sign the document ending WWI in France. Historical events and INC interpretation don’t jibe because what we read in Revelation 7:1-3 is for the wind (war) not to break out, but war broke out on July 28, 1914 and continued on up to November 11, 1918. The four angels (political leaders of 4 nations) named by the INC as listed above came together to sign a document ending World War I. Clearly then the four angels of the INC are not the four angels of Rev. 7:1-3.

Another point you should analyze is the instruction of the ascending angel from the east directed to the four angels of verse 1: not to allow the wind (war) to break out to allow and give time to the ascending angel to preach and mark the forehead of the 144,000 of Israel (7:4-8). But war broke out in Europe which lasted from July 28, 1914 to Nov. 11, 1918. Which means that the four major world powers who signed the document ending the war in 1918 are not the angels of Rev. 7:1-3 because the Rev. 7:1-3 angels are not to allow war to start, but the angels of the Armistice Day in 1918 were seen as ending the First World War. According to INC interpretation the “ascending angel should preach while there is no war” but Mr. Felix Manalo preached while World War I raged. So there’s discrepancy.

Still another observation is that if Mr. Felix Manalo is the angel ascending from the east who shouted on July 27, 1914 thro his registering the Iglesia ni Cristo corporation in the Philippines and his preaching, Mr. Manalo was not heard and obeyed because the wind of war broke out on July 28, 1914. So the claims of the INC do not jibe with world history.

Further observation is that Mr. Manalo claims to have started shouting and preaching on July 27, 1914 giving instruction to the four angels. On July 27, 1914 there were no four angels or no four world leaders in the war at that time. There were only two nations at war: Austria-Hungary under Emperor Joseph Francis and the ruler of Serbia. There were no four angels at that time, no four major world powers to speak of. Again, INC apologists don’t agree with world history.

Above information considered, the July 27, 1914 date of registration of the Iglesia ni Cristo corporation has no bearing on the outbreak of the First World War. Walang kaugnayan ang July 27, 1914 na pagkarehistro ng INC sa pagputok ng Unang Digmaang Pandaigdig.

Christ’s Persona before Incarnation

Can See and Hear: Persona or Idea? (Part IV)

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Views on October 29, 2008 at 3:10 pm

Christ’s Persona before Incarnation (Series 4)

By Eusebio Tanicala, Ph.D.

INTRODUCTION

This is a series of articles that will help clarify the status of the Logos (Word) of John 1:1, 14 before the incarnation of Christ thro Virgin Mary. One side affirms that Christ before His incarnation was a spirit persona; another side claims that Christ was a mere idea, a plan, a promise or a concept much as an architect’s plan of a house.

Proposition A states it like this: Resolved according to the Bible that Christ before His incarnation thro Virgin Mary was a spirit persona.

Proposition B States it like this: Resolved according to the Bible that Christ before His incarnation thro Virgin Mary was a mere idea, a plan, in God’s mind.

PERSONA DEFINED
A persona is a spirit or human entity or being that has mind, a self consciousness, and is capable of moral choices and has action.

Angels are personal entities. Human beings are personal entities. Satan the Devil is a spirit persona.
To this writer, Christ, before His incarnation, was a spirit persona, the Second Person in the Godhead. When Christ became flesh, He remained a persona with deity in Him as well as humanity in Him. A very unique occurrence, in fact a mystery, in human history.

IMPORTANCE OF THE STUDY
Determining whether or not Christ was a persona before His incarnation in A.D. 1 helps to clarify the issue of Christ’s deity.

LOGOS IN THE LEXICON
(Please refer to series #1 on the various applications of the term logos in the NT.)

OBJECTIVE
After reflecting on this lesson you should be able to state your conclusion that a persona rather than an idea or plan is identified with the actions of seeing and hearing God.

In this series we submit passages where Christ is understood to have existed before A.D. 1 and where he is understood to have seen and heard the Father. Seeing and hearing are actions properly identified with a person and NOT identified with a plan, an idea or a concept. A plan cannot see nor hear.

In the following verses from the Gospel of John (NKJV), please notice actions, descriptions and attributes. Ask if these befit a spirit person or do they apply to an idea or concept.

John 3:31,32 – These lines are from John the Baptist. The pronoun “He” refers a persona, not a plan or an idea; the “He” has seen and heard what He testified or taught to the Jews. Seeing, hearing, and testifying are acts of a persona. Verse 31 gives the background that Christ heard things in Heaven not on earth below. These are not acts of an idea or a concept in God’s mind.

John 5:19-20 — These words are from Christ. The personal pronouns “He” and “Him” are used to refer to a persona. Acts of seeing, doing, the Father showing to Him all things are actions that befit a persona. These are not acts of an idea or a concept.

John 6:46 – No man has seen the Father except He who is from God; He has seen the Father. The personal pronoun “He” refers to a persona not to an idea or concept. The act of seeing is properly befits a persona not an idea. You may refer to John 1:18 which gives about the same idea as declared by John the Baptist of seeing and knowing God.

John 8:23 &26 – Christ said, “I am from above” or heaven and further he said, “I speak to the world those things which I heard from Him.” The personal pronoun “I” refers to a persona not to an idea; and the act of having “heard” befits a persona and cannot be said of a concept or an idea.

John 8:40 & 15:15 – Christ said, “But now you seek to kill Me, a Man who has told you the truth which I heard from God.” And “…for all things that I heard from My Father I have made known to you.” The hearing by Christ is logically before his incarnation.

John 17:25 – Christ said, “…for You loved Me before the foundation of the world” and you supplement it with 17:5, “And now, O Father, glorify Me together with yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was” the declarations give an unmistakable picture: there was a persona of Christ before He was incarnated in A.D. 1.

If these acts of seeing God and hearing from God were assigned to Christ’s humanity only, then the charge of blasphemy by the Jewish elders, Pharisees and high priests would be true and justifiably worthy of punishment. It is the spirit persona of Christ that He had before His incarnation that exonerates Him from the charge of blasphemy.

Bible, Calvinism, death, life, sin

Death, Life and Calvinism

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Views on October 27, 2008 at 2:53 pm

Eusebio Tanicala, Ph. D.

IF DEATH IS AUTOMATICALLY PASSED ON TO OFF SPRINGS THEN LIFE SHOULD AUTOMATICALLY PASS ON TO OFF SPRINGS

Calvinism says that Adam and Eve’s disobedience brought death to their off springs automatically. The line of reasoning is that dead men could produce only dead off springs. The dead passes on to their off springs their deadness.

But John Calvin did not apply his line of logic on the offsprings of Abraham and Sarah who were people of faith. See Heb. 11:8-19; Romans 4:1-12; James 2:21-24. Abraham and Sarah were justified by their faith and obedience; they were friends of God, they had life in them. They were alive. The alive should pass on to their off spring their aliveness. If not, why not?

Today, Calvinists also talk about being “born again” as taught in John 3:3-5.And Calvinists have in their midst couples who are born again, made holy by Christ’s blood when they obey. These couples (husband and wife) beget children. Do Calvinists say that born again, holy couples automatically pass on to their off springs their “born againness)? Why can’t they pass on to their children their aliveness? If not. why not?

So you feel the faulty logic of John Calvin. Yes, he was not logical because he didn’t stick to what the Bible says. #

Christ’s Persona before Incarnation

Spirit Personae May Take Physical Forms (Part III)

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Views on October 25, 2008 at 3:05 pm

Christ’s Persona before Incarnation (Series 3)

By Eusebio Tanicala, Ph.D.

Some think that God cannot take on a physical form. They could not think of God appearing in a material form. We read of spirit beings taking physical form or appearing in material form. This lesson discusses the idea of pure spirit beings taking material form.

OBJECTIVE
After This lesson, the reader should be able to reason out that spirit beings are allowed to take the appearance of physical or material forms.

DISCUSSION
The Bible records many instances where spirit personae are said to have entered/possessed the faculties of humans. Passages like 1 Samuel 16:14-23; Matt. 8:28-34; Mark 5:1-20; Mark 7:25; Mark 9:17-26; Luke 4:33; 8:26-39; 8:55; Acts 16:16-18; Acts 19:15-16 are some of these instances which are recorded in the Bible.

When a spirit persona strongly clings to and possesses the faculty of a human being just like the story in Mark 5:1-20, we find that the identity of the human host and the possessing evil spirit converge and come into congruence so much so that the two act in unity or become as one personality. In Mark 5, the evil spirit dominates the host human being that the spirit persona and the human persona become as one. The 4,000 spirits even act as one.

Good angels can become fire (Psalm 104:4; Heb. 1:7) but their essence is not fire. Angels can appear as human beings or male (lalaki) but they are not human in essence. See Luke 24:4.

In Psalm 40:6-8 we feel that a person is talking, King David as the type and Christ as the anti type person. In

Hebrew 10:5 we read that the person that talks in Psalm 40 tells of a physical body having been prepared for that spirit persona to enter into. The Holy Spirit thro the Virgin Mary prepared that body into which the spirit persona Christ entered. The spirit persona of Christ completely fused into a complete congruence with the prepared human body that the Bible speaks of one persona, a hypostatic union of two natures. This phenomenon is new and unique in history. For 33 years deity and humanity mysteriously fused together in ways we could not fathom.

The material human body of Jesus was transformed into an immaterial heavenly body after Jesus’ resurrection that is recorded in the Gospels. So the Apostle Paul declares this idea in 2 Cor. 5:16, “Therefore, from now on, we regard no one according to the flesh. Even though we have known Christ according to the flesh, yet now we know Him thus no longer.” Apostle Paul refers to the Christ after resurrection.
To the Hebrews, God’s most sacred name which was revealed to the prophets was Yahweh (YHWH). This name may convey various shades of inter-related meanings like the following:

(a) Self existing one; (b) To be; (c) I am; (d) I am what I am; (e) I become what I want to become. So we should not limit Yahweh God in what He wants to be and how He wants to communicate Himself to humanity.
In different ages and to different people Yahweh God communicated/impressed Himself upon humanity in various forms or impressions: (a) Yahweh God talked with Adam and Eve – Gen. 1:28-30; 216-17; visited Adam and Eve in the Garden – Gen. 3:8-19; (b) Yahweh God walked with Enoch – Gen. 5:23; (c) Noah found grace in the eyes of Yahweh God and God walked and talked with Noah – Gen. 6:8, 9, 13-22. (d) Yahweh God talked to Abram – Gen. 12ff; 15ff calling Abram out of Ur, into and out of Haran into Canaan; (e) Yahweh God appeared and talk to and ate with Abram as a human being (male) – Gen. 18-19 (f) Yahweh God n the form of a material human being wrestled with Jacob – Gen 32:22-32; (g) Yahweh God also called Angel of Yahweh appeared to and conversed with Moses in the form of flame of fire in a burning bush – Exodus 3:1-22; (h) Yahweh God impressed Himself upon Israel on Mt. Sinai in thundering, lightning, thick cloud, fire and smoke – Exodus 19; Heb. 12 25-29; (i) Yahweh God appeared to, talked with Moses face to face, in a very intimate way, but God did not appear in the fully glory and majesty of deity – Exodus 33:12-23; Num. 12:8; Deut. 5:4; Deut. 34:10; (j) The Angel of Yahweh, who is Yahweh Himself appeared and talked with Gideon – Judges 11-27; (k) Christ became a material rock in the wilderness and He followed Israel throughout the 40 years of wandering – 1 Cor. 10:4; Exodus 17:1-7; Num. 20:1-13.

If Yahweh God appeared or manifested Himself in various material forms in the OT, it should not be unthinkable nor impossible for Him to become flesh in the being of our Lord Jesus Christ to accomplish the salvation of human kind which is the most interesting story ever told.

Christ, Comparing and contrasting the Devil’s essence, Godhead

The Devil’s Persona & Christ’s Persona– A Comparison & Contrast (Part II)

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Views on October 24, 2008 at 2:55 pm

Christ’s Persona before Incarnation (Series 2)

By Eusebio Tanicala, Ph.D.

Comparing and contrasting the Devil’s essence, attributes, works, motives, strategies with those of Christ’s essence, attributes, works, motives and strategies will reveal many things. This writer has wrestled with this approached for many, many years before he was able to formulate it about the year 1993. Please consider this approach.

OBJECTIVE
After reflecting on this lesson, the reader should be able to reason out that if many things are granted to be possible with Satan, many of these things should also be granted as possible with Christ, the Second Persona in the Godhead.

A. Devil: He was a spirit persona before taking the form of a snake of flesh and bones.
Christ: He was a spirit persona before taking the form of a man of flesh and bones.

B. Devil: He was a created angel with free will before becoming Satan.
Christ: He was the creator of all invisible and visible principalities and powers.

C. Devil: A persona who became the arch enemy of the Godhead.
Christ: A persona who remained loyal and part of the Godhead.

D. Devil: A spirit persona who took the form of snake of flesh and bones.
Christ: A spirit persona who took the form of man of flesh and bones.

E. Devil: He became a snake and he persuaded Eve to rebel against God.
Christ: He became man and he persuaded children of Eve to obey God.

F. Devil: From outside the material universe He entered into the material world.
Christ: From outside the material universe He entered into the material world.

G. Devil: He is a liar and the father of lies.
Christ: He is the truth and the promoter of truth.

H. Devil: A spirit persona who brought death to humanity.
Christ: A spirit persona who is life and brought life to humanity.

I. Devil: Took physical form of snake but didn’t lose his spirit persona.
Christ: Took physical form of man but didn’t lose his spirit persona.

J. Devil: Died or disappeared as a snake but didn’t stop being Satan.
Christ: Died as a man but didn’t stop being God.

K. Devil: A spirit persona became a snake of flesh and bones.
Christ: A spirit persona became a man of flesh and bones.

L. Devil: A spirit persona became flesh and bones – is it readily accepted by all? ___
Christ: A spirit persona became flesh and bones – is it readily accepted by all? ___

M. Devil: Snake at Eden disappeared/died, did the spirit-persona Satan die? ___
Christ: Man at the cross died, did the spirit-persona Christ die? ___

N. Devil: How long did he exist on earth in the form of flesh and bone snake? ___
Christ: How long did He exist on earth in the form of flesh and bone man? ___

O. Devil: When his head was crushed by the woman’s seed, what was that head? ___
Christ: When his heel was bitten by the snake, what was that heel? ___

P. Devil: Is the spirit essence-nature of Satan flesh and bones? ___
Christ: Is the spirit essence-nature of Christ flesh and bones? ___

Q. Devil: Can the spirit Satan become flesh and bones? ___
Christ: Can the spirit Christ become flesh and bones? ___

If and when a Bible student honestly answers the above questions, I believe that he would be able to accept that Christ was a spirit persona before He became man. I welcome comments, observations or reactions to this article.

Creator, God, Persona, Universe

Creator of the Universe: A Persona or a Plan? (Part I)

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Views on October 22, 2008 at 2:55 pm

By Eusebio Tanicala, Ph.D.

INTRODUCTION
This is a series of articles to clarify the issue on the status of the “Logos” (Word) of John 1:1, 14. The period we look at is before the incarnation or before the “Logos” became flesh. One side of this issue affirms that the “Logos’was a spirit persona; the other side claims that He was a mere plan, an impersonal idea, or a concept which materialized or concretized with the incarnation of Christ thro the Virgin Mary in A. D. 1

Proposition A is like this: Resolved according to the Bible that the “Logos” of John 1:1, 14 before the incarnation of Christ thro Virgin Mary was a spirit persona.

Proposition B is like this: Resolved according to the Bible that the “Logos” of John 1:1, 14 before the incarnation of Christ thro Virgin Mary was a mere plan or a concept in God’s mind.

PERSONA DEFINED
A persona is a spirit being/entity or human being/entity that has a mind, a self consciousness, is capable of moral choices and has action.

Angels are persona beings or entities. Human beings are persona entities. Satan the Devil is a spirit being or persona. This writer affirms that Christ, before His incarnation thro Virgin Mary, was a spirit persona, a spirit being, the Second Persona in the Godhead or the Holy Trinity.

When Christ became flesh, He was a persona. In that one persona, Christ had deity in Him as well as humanity in Him. Hypostatic union is the term applied to the union of two natures in the one persona of Christ.

IMPORTANCE OF THE STUDY
Determining whether or not Christ was a persona before His incarnation will help clarify the question of Christ’s deity.

OBJECTIVE
After presenting this series #1, one should be able reason out that the Logos in the Book of John is a persona and not an impersonal idea, not a mere plan, not a mere concept in God’s mind.

VERSES TO ANALYZE
For every action, description or attribute mentioned in a passage in this series ask the question: “Does this befit a spirit persona or does it point to an impersonal promised idea?” “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. In Him was life, and the life was the light of men.”(John 1:1-4, NKJV) “And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.”(John 1:14 NKJV)

Points to consider:
(a) Scholars and translators of the KJV and the NKJV all feel that the “Logos” (in the Greek text) which is translated Word in English are capitalized in John 1:1 &14; 1 John 1:1 and Rev. 19:13 because, as grammarians, they felt it is a proper noun, the name of a Persona as stated in Rev. 19:13.

(b) The preposition “with” (“pros” in the Greek text) points to the location of the Logos in relation to God (Father) which was “beside” or “face to face” with God. Were the “Logos” an impersonal idea or a verbalized concept, the preposition should be “in” according to the rule in grammar.

(c) The personal pronouns “Him” which refer to the “Logos” according to the rule in grammar should refer to a persona in prose literature, and not to an impersonal idea, plan, promise or concept.

(d) The act of creating (bring animate entities and inanimate objects into existence from nothing) is more logically assigned to a persona rather than to an impersonal idea or a plan. This act of creating by and through the “Logos” is sufficiently supported by Colossians 1:16-17 which reads, “For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him. And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist.” Hebrew 1:10-12; Psalm 102:25-27 point to Christ as creator of the heavens and the earth.

The above passages clearly prove the existence of the “Logos” as a persona before He became flesh, before he became a human being.

GREEK-ENGLISH LEXICON
Here is a brief summary on the three major usages of the term logos from Thayer’s Greek- English Lexicon of the New Testament, pp. 380-82:

I. As respects to SPEECH: a word, what some one has said, discourse, what is communicated by instruction, anything reported in speech, thing spoken of, and a thing spoken about;
II. Its use as respects to the MIND alone: reason, account, reckoning, in relation to, cause;
III. In several passages in the writings of John how “logos” denotes the essential WORD of God, i.e. the personal (hypostatic) wisdom and power in union with God, his minister in the creation and government of the universe, the cause of all the world’s life both physical and ethical, which for the procurement of man’s salvation put on human nature in the person of Jesus the Messiah and shone forth conspicuously from his words and deeds.

age of culpability, John Calvin, Moses, righteousness, sin, the Prophets

John Calvin vs. Moses and the Prophets

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Views on October 13, 2008 at 2:39 pm

By Eusebio Tanicala, Ph.D.

Adam and Eve committed sin when they ate the forbidden fruit. They sinned and died that very day. All humanity died at that very day of parental disobedience. Calvinism claims that every succeeding generation after Adam and Eve are also as dead as Adam and Eve. People dead in sin beget people dead in sin. The sin of parents are imputed to off springs. But the idea of Augustine about “adamic sin” or “inherited sin” is wrong. This idea of Augustine was accepted by John Calvin, a French lawyer, and calls it “total depravity.” He taught that all off springs of Adam and Eve are totally depraved, dead in sin, They are zombies. They are insensitive to the world. They could do nothing.

But the passages of the Bible overwhelmingly disagree with John Calvin’s idea. Notice the following passages: Deut. 24:16; 2 Kings 14:6; Jeremiah 31:30; 2 Chronicles 25:4. Please read these passages. Let’s notice Ezekiel 14:10 (NKJV) – “They shall bear their iniquity;” v. 13 – “When a land sins against me by persistent unfaithfulness, I will stretch out my hand against it…” v. 14 – Noah, David, Job are righteous people, if they were in certain towns in the midst of sinners they would not impute their righteousness upon others. V. 16—“they would deliver neither sons nor daughters, only they would be delivered.” Vs. 18, 20 teaches that the righteousness of the righteous are their own. If righteousness is not automatically imputed, it follows that guilt is not also automatically imputed.

Ezekiel 18:4 – The soul who sins shall die. Vs 5-9 – “But if a man is just and does what is lawful and right … If he has walked in all my statutes and kept my judgments faithfully … He is just he shall surely live! Says the Lord.” Vs. 10-13 – If a son does abominable things, “He shall surely die; his blood shall be upon him.” V. 17 – Son does not die for the iniquity of his father. V. 18 – The father dies for his own iniquity. v. 20- The soul who sins shall die, the son shall not bear the guilt of the father, and the father shall not bear the iniquity of his son.

Ezekiel 18:1-5 and 19:13-15. These parts strongly suggest the innocent state of children before they reach the age of accountability, the age of culpability.

The above passages clearly disprove the interpretation of John Calvin that off springs automatically inherit the death sentence of parents. John Calvin is wrong. The Lord God, Moses, Jeremiah, Ezekiel and Jesus are right. #

FORM OF A SERVANT, FORM OF GOD

Form of God and Form of a Servant

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Views on October 11, 2008 at 4:24 am

By Eusebio Tanicala, Ph.D.

Some preachers think that the phrases “form of a servant” and “form of God” are parallel and provide them a sound argument in proving the deity of Christ. This is the line of reasoning: Christ took the form of a servant– he was truly a servant; Christ was in the form of God– he was truly God. In a Q & A procedure, it is like this: (1) When Christ took the form of a servant, was he truly a servant or not? (2) When Christ was in the form of God, was he truly God or not?

Presumptions in the above are wrong. First, the discussion or proposition is about the deity of Christ. Not the form of deity. Deity refers to essential nature. Likas na kalagayan. His substance, his essence. Essence or substance is what makes God truly God. Essence or substance cannot be parted with, could not be separated from the person of God. Just as a man’s humanity could not be removed from a human being. A man cannot part or empty himself of his humanity. You and I will always be human. Christ has been and will always be deity or God.

Philippians 2:7 says, “but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant.” (ASV) To some, this emptying is laying aside and it refers to Christ’s laying aside his deity (iwaksi in Iloco or itabi in Tagalog). Far from it. Verse 7 is not talking about Christ’s emptying Himself of his being God. Both KJV & NKJV renders the clause as “made himself of no reputation” instead of “emptied himself” of the ASV.

Read the rest of this entry »

Complete God, Complete Human, Diety of Christ, God, Humanity of Christ, Jesus Christ, religion, second coming

Christ doesn’t know His coming, therefore He isn’t God.

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Views on October 9, 2008 at 4:21 am

By Eusebio Tanicala, Ph.D.

“CHRIST DOESN’T KNOW HIS COMING, THEREFORE HE ISN’T GOD.”

“But that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.” (Mark 14:32) Because we believe that Christ is God, and God is omniscient, would not Mark 13:32 and Matt. 24:36 negate the belief on the deity of Christ? Many would like to get a satisfactory answer to this question.

The following is my suggested approach to clarify this issue. Take the following steps which are inter-related:

FIRST STEP: Clarify who we are talking about. In Mark 13:26 the subject is the “Son of Man coming in the clouds with great power and glory.” In Matt. 24:30, 37, 39, 44 the subject is the “Son of Man.”

Now we have to determine which aspect of our Lord Jesus Christ is this “Son of Man” because in our belief He is both complete human and complete God. Colossians 1:19; Col. 2:9 and John 1:1, 14 support this belief. We should make a distinction between “Christ-Son of Man” and “Christ-God.” By taking Psalm 2, Acts 13:33; Heb. 1 and Heb. 5:5 as background, we can infer that His becoming the “Son of Man” started with his human birth or may have started with His anointing. In Psalm 2, the type-person is King David while the anti-type-person or fulfillment is Jesus Christ. When was David begotten by the LORD so he was called begotten son? It must have been in his anointing to become king of Israel by the prophet Samuel. Taking the clue from King David’s begetting, Christ’s being “Son of Man” must refer to his humanity. Not His deity. In relation to the day and hour of his coming with power and glory, as far as Jesus’ human knowledge was concerned, He didn’t know.

For an illustration, learn to differentiate the constitutional personality from the private individual personality of the President of the Republic of the Philippines. Currently we have President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo (PGMA) in office. For every item below ask the question: “Is this the constitutional person or the private individual person of PGMA?” (a) PGMA was born April 1947. (b) PGMA is the daughter of Dra. Eva Macaraeg-Macapagal. (c) PGMA spoke before the U.N. General Assembly last month. (d) PGMA is the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the Philippines. (e) PGMA is the mother of two congressmen. (f) PGMA is married to Atty. Miguel Arroyo. (g) PGMA has today signed into law ten bills at Malacanang Palace. (h) PGMA graduated from a university in the United States. (i) PGMA celebrates her birthday in April. (j) PGMA enjoys the presence of her grandchildren. (k) PGMA’s official family is having a conference at Malacanang Palace’s Heroes Hall. (l) Mike Arroyo is the head of PGMA’s family.

Some believe that even His deity didn’t know the day and hour of this glorious coming. It is suggested that this attribute of omniscience was among those temporarily discarded or laid aside by Christ in the “emptying” mentioned in Phil. 2:7. I disagree to this idea. For me, omniscience is an essential attribute of deity which could not be laid aside. Just as a philosopher in the first century when captured during a military invasion could not empty himself of his knowledge although he could be sold as a slave and become a bondservant in another land.

SECOND STEP: Learn how to shift from the human level up to the deity level or vice versa when one studies the life and statements of our Lord Jesus Christ. Failure to do this shifting could result to a failure in hermeneutics just as the Jews failed to recognize Jesus as the Messiah because they failed in their interpretation of scriptures. In fact Christ at one time said to the scribes and Pharisees, “You err because you don’t know the scriptures” when they dwelt only on the material-physical level of human existence.

For example, in the case of the Messiah, Jesus asked the Pharisees: “Whose son is the Christ?” (Matt. 22:41-46) They answered, “David’s son.” Then Jesus asked, “Why did King David call the Christ his Lord or Master if the Christ is his son?” The Pharisees were stunned. Their failure was that they only recognized Christ’s humanity. Dapat ang sagot ng mga Fariseo ay ganito: “Kung ayon sa pagka-Dios siya ay Panginoon ni Haring David; kung ayon sa pagkatao—anak siya ni Haring David.” This should also be the way we look at Christ’s statement in Mark 14:32: Kung ayon sa pagka-tao, hindi niya alam; kung ayon sa pagka-Dios alam niya.

There are other declarations made by our Lord that pointed to His humanity and NOT to His deity. He said, “I thirst”, “Children have you any food?”, “The Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head down.” Some descriptions like “firstborn son wrapped in swaddling clothes”, “Jesus increased in wisdom and stature before God and man”, “he wept”, “he ate” “he slept”, “was crucified”, “was buried” etc. Read Isaiah 53 and you find many acts and descriptions pointing to the humanity of Jesus.

On the other hand, statements like the following are assigned to Christ speaking as God: Jn 5:19, 20 – He sees the Father working; He does what the Father does; 5:23—give honor to the Son as you honor the Father; Jn 6:33, 38, 41,42, 51,58; 8:23; —he came down from heaven which act he did before incarnation; Jn 1:18, 46; 8:26; 8:38, 55– He knew, he saw, he heard, he proceeded from the Father.

THIRD STEP: Recognize Relative Negation as a figure of speech that puts focus on the ultimate authority without totally denying the proper place of other entities so recognized. Christ employed Relative Negation in Matt. 19:16-17; Mark 10:17-18; Luke 18:18-19. Christ was addressed as good teacher, but he relatively negated it and pointed to God as the ONE who is good and none other else. But Matt. 20:15 points to Jesus Christ as the master of the vineyard and he calls himself good. There’s the good tree that bears good fruit (Matt. 7:17); there’s the good man in Luke 6:45; there’s good soil, etc. Relative Negation is also employed in 1 Cor. 1:17 where Apostle Paul said he was not sent to baptize but to preach the gospel. The apostle did not reject baptism but since the Corinthians were putting too much emphasis on their baptism/baptizer and relegated Christ’ death-burial-resurrection he had to jolt them so that they would focus on the proper and foremost source of salvific power: the gospel.

The Father is God. In John 10:29 & 14:28 Christ says that the Father is greater than he is. This refers to His humanity in relation to God. However in John 5:16-23 Christ tells about mutual relationship with the Father: both work, both have knowledge, both are sources of life, both are judging, and both should be paid the same level of honor. On the level of deity, the Father and Son are equal says v. 18.

On the level of deity, we affirm that Christ knows everything. See John 1:18; 2:24-25; 7:28-29; 8:13-20; 8:54-55; 16:14-15; 17:25 and 21:17. The above items considered, the aspect of Christ speaking in Mark 13:32 therefore is the human Jesus.

FOURTH STEP: Determine the recipients’ readiness to receive the message. There were times when Jesus withheld information because the audience was not ready for it or the direct and clear information could be misinterpreted or could offend instead of building up belief. Even in the last week of Jesus’ ministry he said to the disciples, “I still have many things to say to you but you cannot bear them now.” Much talking would be useless. It’s throwing jewels to the swine.

To illustrate this, please note how Jesus was scolded by Peter when he revealed his forthcoming suffering. See. Matt. 16:21-23. A multitude of followers were offended (v. 61) and left Him when they could not understand Jesus’ statements that he is the bread of life, the bread that came down from heaven, eating his flesh and drinking his blood in John 6:41-71. When Jesus talked about his kingdom, Mrs. Zebedee asked Him to give the top 2 highest positions in the kingdom to James and John. This created jealousy and bickering among the 12 apostles. Note that Jesus made a statement in v. 23 to draw away attention from Himself and focus the power of appointment to another, understandably the Father. Christ made a conditional statement in John 21:21-23 and it was misinterpreted.

By drawing away attention from himself, Jesus stopped misinterpretations, misrepresentations and even stopped useless discussions. What is important in this issue is preparedness. Knowing the exact date and hour is no problem.

FIFTH STEP: Consider the wealth of information given which was sufficient to guide people in preparing for that coming of the Son of Man. They were concerned about the date and hour, but they were not concerned with the what and how of preparation. It’s like bar and accountancy examinees being concerned with the date and time of examinations but unconcerned with what to review and what to do in preparation for the days of the examination. The what and the how of preparation are supplied in Matt. 24 and 25; Mark 13; and Luke 21 but no question was asked about being prepared.

We should not form the attitude of the generation of Noah that was warned for a period of 120 years. Instead of making preparations for the announced destruction, the people were concerned with great signs of an approaching day and hour of destruction. See 2 Peter 3:4. They were saying that in the past one hundred years and in the current one hundred years all things have been the same. So they concluded that Noah was a crazy old man. Usual day to day activities of carefree living continued on. Then suddenly the heavy down pour came without let up for 40 days and 40 nights. Skeptics all perished.

So don’t be like the generation of Noah that was concerned with the day and hour but not concerned with personal preparations for safety and evacuation.

SIXTH STEP: Clarify the term “only.” Most common meaning given to this word is that it is a limiting adjective: no other person or entity except the one named. But the word could mean “highly preferred or an outstanding one.” Possibly Christ said, “I prefer that the Father be the one to reveal the day and hour, not me.”

Let’s prove this idea. Please see Genesis 22:2, 16. We read from this passage: “Isaac your ONLY son” said Yahweh God to Abraham. Dare anyone accuse Yahweh God of ignorance or lying when He said that Isaac was Abraham’s only son? Was not Ishmael born 13 years earlier to Abraham and his wife Hagar? In Matthew 23:10, Christ said, “Do not be called teachers; for ONE is your teacher, the Christ.” Is not a class facilitator in the Sunday Bible study hour called “teacher”? Don’t we call faculty members at Philippine Bible College “teachers”? So we have shown that “only” or “one” is not employed as limiting terms all the time.

SEVENTH STEP: Read this declaration of Christ: “For I have not spoken on My own authority; but the Father who sent Me gave Me a command, what I should say and what I should speak. And I know that His command is everlasting life. Therefore, whatever I speak, just as the Father has told Me, so I speak.” (NKJV) Read also John 14:10. So we should not demote Christ. Kung mayroon kayong angal, go and discuss this matter with the Father.

Bible, delight, God, happiness, joy

Extreme Joy and Happiness

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Views on October 8, 2008 at 4:50 pm

By Jhun Ma

Ps 37:4- Delight yourself in the LORD and he will give you the desires of your heart.

Delight:
1 : a high degree of gratification : joy; also : extreme satisfaction
2 : something that gives great pleasure
3 archaic : the power of affording pleasure

intransitive senses
1 : to take great pleasure ²delighted in playing the guitar³
2 : to give keen enjoyment ²a book certain to delight³
transitive senses : to give joy or satisfaction to
–de£light£er noun

I. Importance Of Delight Of God In Our Life

A. When God Is Delighted In You Because of Your Obedience to His Command and Decrees.
Deut. 30:8-10 : 8 You will again obey the LORD and follow all his commands I am giving you today. 9 Then the LORD your God will make you most prosperous in all the work of your hands and in the fruit of your womb, the young of your livestock and the crops of your land. The LORD will again delight in you and make you prosperous, just as he delighted in your fathers, 10 if you obey the LORD your God and keep his commands and decrees that are written in this Book of the Law and turn to the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul.

B. When God Is Not Delighted Because of Disobedience
1 Sam 15:22-23 – But Samuel replied: “Does the LORD delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices as much as in obeying the voice of the LORD? To obey is better than sacrifice, and to heed is better than the fat of rams. For rebellion is like the sin of divination, and arrogance like the evil of idolatry. Because you have rejected the word of the LORD, he has rejected you as king.”

C. The Lord Will Discipline those He Loves & those He Delights In
Prov 3:12- because the LORD disciplines those he loves, as a father the son he delights in.

D. The Lord Will Deliver Those Who Delights In Him
Ps 22:8- 8 “He trusts in the LORD; let the LORD rescue him. Let him deliver him, since he delights in him.”

E. The Lord Will Uphold Those Who Delights In Him
Ps 37:23-24 – 23 If the LORD delights in a man’s way, he makes his steps firm; though he stumble, he will not fall, for the LORD upholds him with his hand.

II. Who Are Those Whom God Are Delighted With?

Lord’s Delight In His People -Ps 149:4-5 – For the LORD takes delight in his people; he crowns the humble with salvation. Let the saints rejoice in this honor and sing for joy on their beds.

The Lord’s Delight In Israel -Isa 5:7- The vineyard of the LORD Almighty is the house of Israel, and the men of Judah are the garden of his delight. And he looked for justice, but saw bloodshed; for righteousness, but heard cries of distress.

God’s Delight On Jerusalem -Isa 65:18-20-But be glad and rejoice forever in what I will create,for I will create Jerusalem to be a delight and its people a joy. I will rejoice over Jerusalem and take delight in my people;the sound of weeping and of crying will be heard in it no more. “Never again will there be in it an infant who lives but a few days,or an old man who does not live out his years;he who dies at a hundred will be thought a mere youth;he who fails to reach a hundred will be considered accursed.

Zeph 3:16-17 On that day they will say to Jerusalem, “Do not fear, O Zion; do not let your hands hang limp.
The LORD your God is with you, he is mighty to save. He will take great delight in you, he will quiet you with his love, he will rejoice over you with singing.”

The Lord Who Has Delighted In King Solomon
1 Kings 10:8-9- Praise be to the LORD your God, who has delighted in you and placed you on the throne of Israel. Because of the LORD’s eternal love for Israel, he has made you king, to maintain justice and righteousness.”

The Lord’s Delight In Jesus (As The True Israel)
Matt 12:15-18- Aware of this, Jesus withdrew from that place. Many followed him, and he healed all their sick, warning them not to tell who he was. This was to fulfill what was spoken through the prophet Isaiah: 18 “Here is my servant whom I have chosen, the one I love, in whom I delight; I will put my Spirit on him, and he will proclaim justice to the nations.

The Lord’s Delight on Those Who Understands and Knows Him
Jer 9:24- but let him who boasts boast about this: that he understands and knows me, that I am the LORD, who exercises kindness, justice and righteousness on earth, for in these I delight,”
declares the LORD.

God’s Delight In His Servant (The Messiah)
Isa 42:1- “Here is my servant, whom I uphold, my chosen one in whom I delight; I will put my Spirit on him and he will bring justice to the nations.

The Lord Delight’s In those Whose Ways Are Blameless
Prov 11:20- The LORD detests men of perverse heart but he delights in those whose ways are blameless.

The Lord Delights In Men Who Are Truthful
Prov 12:22- The LORD detests lying lips, but he delights in men who are truthful.

Messiah’s Delight In The Lord
Isa 61:10- I delight greatly in the LORD; my soul rejoices in my God. For he has clothed me with garments of salvation and arrayed me in a robe of righteousness, as a bridegroom adorns his head like a priest, and as a bride adorns herself with her jewels.

The Lord’s Delight In Honesty
Prov 11:1- The LORD abhors dishonest scales, but accurate weights are his delight.

God’s Delight In Showing Mercy
Mic 7:18- Who is a God like you, who pardons sin and forgives the transgression of the remnant of his inheritance? You do not stay angry forever but delight to show mercy.

God’s Delight In Those Who Fear Him And Put their Hope In His Unfailing Love
Ps 147:11 -the LORD delights in those who fear him, who put their hope in his unfailing love.

III. How Do We Express Our Delight In God?

A. Delighting In God By Having A Joyful Heart -1 Sam 2:1-2- Then Hannah prayed and said: “My heart rejoices in the LORD; in the LORD my horn is lifted high. My mouth boasts over my enemies, for I delight in your deliverance. “There is no one holy like the LORD; there is no one besides you; there is no Rock like our God.

Ps 35:9-10- 9 Then my soul will rejoice in the LORD and delight in his salvation. My whole being will exclaim, “Who is like you, O LORD? You rescue the poor from those too strong for them, the poor and needy from those who rob them.”

B. Delighting In Revering God’s Name – Neh 1:11-O Lord, let your ear be attentive to the prayer of this your servant and to the prayer of your servants who delight in revering your name. Give your servant success today by granting him favor in the presence of this man.”

C. Delighting In God Through Prayer – Job 22:26-27 – Surely then you will find delight in the Almighty and will lift up your face to God. You will pray to him, and he will hear you, and you will fulfill your vows.

Job 27:10- Will he find delight in the Almighty? Will he call upon God at all times?

D. Delighting In God’s Command and His Words – Ps 1:2- 2 But his delight is in the law of the LORD, and on his law he meditates day and night.

Ps 112:1-3 -Praise the LORD. Blessed is the man who fears the LORD, who finds great delight in his commands. His children will be mighty in the land; the generation of the upright will be blessed. Wealth and riches are in his house, and his righteousness endures forever.

Ps 119:16-18 -16 I delight in your decrees; I will not neglect your word. Do good to your servant, and I will live; I will obey your word. 18 Open my eyes that I may see wonderful things in your law.

Ps 119:24- 24 Your statutes are my delight; they are my counselors.

Ps 119:35-37 – Direct me in the path of your commands, for there I find delight. Turn my heart toward your statutes and not toward selfish gain. Turn my eyes away from worthless things; preserve my life according to your word.

Ps 119:47-48 -47 for I delight in your commands because I love them. I lift up my hands to your commands, which I love, and I meditate on your decrees.

Ps 119:143-144- Trouble and distress have come upon me, but your commands are my delight. Your statutes are forever right; give me understanding that I may live.

Jer 15:16 -When your words came, I ate them; they were my joy and my heart’s delight, for I bear your name, O LORD God Almighty.

Rom 7:22- For in my inner being I delight in God’s law; (If not Delighted In God’s Law)

Ps 119:92 -If your law had not been my delight, I would have perished in my affliction.

E. Delighting In God’s People -Ps 16:2-3- I said to the LORD, “You are my Lord; apart from you I have no good thing.” As for the saints who are in the land, they are the glorious ones in whom is all my delight.

F. Delighting On the Well Being of God’s People -Ps 35:27-May those who delight in my vindication
shout for joy and gladness;may they always say, “The LORD be exalted,who delights in the well-being of his servant.”

G. Delighting In Praising God: Singing & Music -Ps 43:4 -Then will I go to the altar of God, to God, my joy and my delight. I will praise you with the harp, O God, my God.

H. Delighting In Sacrifices With A Humble Heart -Ps 51:16-19- You do not delight in sacrifice, or I would bring it; you do not take pleasure in burnt offerings. The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit; a broken and contrite heart, O God, you will not despise. 18 In your good pleasure make Zion prosper; build up the walls of Jerusalem. Then there will be righteous sacrifices, whole burnt offerings to delight you; then bulls will be offered on your altar.

I. Delight In Pondering God’s Work- Ps 111:2-4-Great are the works of the LORD;they are pondered by all who delight in them. Glorious and majestic are his deeds, and his righteousness endures forever. He has caused his wonders to be remembered; the LORD is gracious and compassionate.

J. Delighting In The Fear Of the Lord (Of Messiah) Isa 11:2-3- The Spirit of the LORD will rest on him–the Spirit of wisdom and of understanding, the Spirit of counsel and of power, the Spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the LORD– and he will delight in the fear of the LORD.

K. Delighting Not In Evil -1 Cor 13:5-6 - Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth.

L. Delighting In All Kind of Suffering For Christ Sake -2 Cor 12:10 -That is why, for Christ’s sake, I delight in weaknesses, in insults, in hardships, in persecutions, in difficulties. For when I am weak, then I am strong.

M. Delight In Sharing The Gospel Of God & Our Lives – 1 Thess 2:8- We loved you so much that we were delighted to share with you not only the gospel of God but our lives as well, because you had become so dear to us.

N. Jewish Delight- Isaiah 58:13-14 -”If you keep your feet from breaking the Sabbath
and from doing as you please on my holy day, if you call the Sabbath a delight and the LORD’s holy day honorable,and if you honor it by not going your own way and not doing as you please or speaking idle words, then you will find your joy in the LORD, and I will cause you to ride on the heights of the land and to feast on the inheritance of your father Jacob.” The mouth of the LORD has spoken.

IV. Other Forms Of Delight

A. Father’s Delight-Prov 29:17- Discipline your son, and he will give you peace; he will bring delight to your soul.

B. Wise Son’s Delight -Prov 23:24-The father of a righteous man has great joy; he who has a wise son delights in him.

C. Delighting In All Our Work -Eccl 2:10- I denied myself nothing my eyes desired; I refused my heart no pleasure. My heart took delight in all my work, and this was the reward for all my labor.

D. Delighting In Your Husband -Song 2:3- Like an apple tree among the trees of the forest is my lover among the young men. I delight to sit in his shade, and his fruit is sweet to my taste.

E. Delighting In Your Wife -Song 7:6-9- How beautiful you are and how pleasing, O love, with your delights! Your stature is like that of the palm, and your breasts like clusters of fruit. I said, “I will climb the palm tree; I will take hold of its fruit.” May your breasts be like the clusters of the vine, the fragrance of your breath like apples, 9 and your mouth like the best wine.

F. Delighting In Wisdom -Prov 10:23- A fool finds pleasure in evil conduct, but a man of understanding delights in wisdom.

Bible, Inherited sin, sin, total depravity, transgression of the law

“IN SIN MY MOTHER CONCEIVED ME”

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Views on October 6, 2008 at 2:33 pm

By Eusebio Tanicala, Ph.D.

Because we in the Churches of Christ believe in the free moral agency of every individual based on Ezekiel 14 and 18, and we define sin as a “transgression of the law” (1 John 3:4) we find Psalms 52:5 a problem. It seems to support the theory of “inherited sin” as well as the theory of “total depravity.”

Based on my study and reflection on Psalms 52, I suggest the following ideas that could help explain v.5:

(1) Consider the background of this chapter. Scholars agree that King David wrote this after he was confronted by the prophet Nathan about his crimes of adultery with Bathsheba and the murder of Army Captain Uriah, a Hittite. This story is in 2 Samuel 11 & 12. Note that the chapter is poetry (NKJV). Remember that poetry tends to exaggerate. This exaggeration is needed because King David exalts the holiness and righteousness of God on one hand while he brings himself down as a rotten, dirty sinner whose sinfulness penetrates deep into the inner recesses of his being. Nothing is good in him. To further exaggerate his own sinfulness, he even goes back to his own mother – that his mother was sinful or that inside the womb, David was already a sinner. The exaggeration is needed because it is generally believed that the fetus and even children are sinless. Even in the Abrahamic and Mosaical covenants, a child is innocent until the 8th day when he is obligated to be circumcised or else suffer some physical penalty. Note also that when King David commented on the death of his first child with Bathsheba, he said, “But why should I fast when he is dead? Can I bring him back again? I will go to him one day, but he cannot return to me.” (2 Sam. 12:23)

In short, King David believed in the innocence of an infant. So v. 5 should be viewed as a poetical exaggeration to describe himself as a rotten sinner. He was not talking about inherited sin or adamic sin.

(2) If we were to take v.5 literally, it would contradict passages like Mark 9:36-37; Mark 10:13-16, Ezekiel 14 and 18 where we are told that the sin of a parent is not imputed on the son. Sis is a personal transgression of the law. Therefore, Psalm 52:5 should not be given a literal meaning of “inherited sin” or total depravity.

(3) Still another view, which to me is not a strong argument, but worth exploring is to understand v. 5 as a confession of his family life. 2 Samuel 17:25 mentions Nahash, father of Abigail and Zeruiah, half sisters of David. Zeruiah is the mother of Joab (2 Sam.17:25). Joab is King David’s army commander. This suggests that Zeruiah was much older than David, David being almost of the same age as his nephew, Joab. It is inferred that Abigail’s mother was either a widow of Nahash or that David’s mother was a concubine of Nahash whom Jesse married, or David’s mother was Jesse’s concubine. Or David’s mother was not a refined woman just as Tamar was not a refined woman in Genesis 38:14-26. If the unrefined character of David’s mother comes out as one meaning, then Psalm 52:5 suggest something.

Even if view #3 is not a possibility, view #1 would still be the dominant idea that gives meaning to view #3. Any of the three views above or all of them help us interpret v. 5. #

sin

Inherited Sin/Original Sin

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Views on October 4, 2008 at 2:08 am

By Eusebio Tanicala, Ph.D.

This article gives some insight into Calvinism on the issue of total depravity. There are two views about the theory of Total Depravity and Regeneration.

Firstly, in the 4th century, St. Augustine came up with the theory that because of Adam and Eve’s disobedience all mankind completely lost God’s grace. All grace was withdrawn from humanity. There were only two people: Adam and Eve. The two comprised all of humanity. What was true of the two became true unto all ages after them. What was true when humanity was 2 individuals, was true when humanity numbered only 20, true when numbered 200, true when numbered 2000, true when humanity became 2,000,000, true when it became 2,000,000,000 and will be true when all of humanity becomes 2 trillion in number, and so on until the end of the ages.

From this thinking, the Roman Catholic Church slowly evolved the doctrine of “Inherited Original Sin. That even an infant is totally depraved so that, if it be possible, even a newly born babe should be given the sacrament of baptism. Borrowing some idea of the OT circumcision, a child should not go beyond 8 days when he should be baptized with a godparent standing as the child’s proxy in faith. It was even taught by some priests that a still-born child should be baptized by a parent or matured relative. Or a child of several hours or several days if it dies should be baptized by any believing person so that the child’s soul would go to “Limbo” and eventually would graduate into Paradise. (Incidentally, the Roman Catholic Church this year has announced that the belief in Limbo is no longer a dogma. Will they disown the theory of original sin after another millennium?)

Roman Catholics are excited about bringing a child into the Christian community through infant/child baptism. Sacramental Baptism starts God’s grace flowing into an individual. And when reason/belief springs from a child’s heart, he participates in the sacramental rite of Confirmation which formalizes a person’s entry into the visible church.

In short, God’s grace returns or is revived in a person via the sacrament of baptism. This is the Roman Church’s doctrine.

Secondly, among Calvinists, the theory of St. Augustine is accepted but developed into a different direction. Calvinism says that man is totally depraved of God’s grace. Man is dead. Man can’t will to do good. Man has no appreciation or sense for what is spiritual. So man’s salvation is granted thro God’s grace only. It is God who injects every tiny ability and desire to live for God. Sola gratia. Man can’t do nothing and does nothing to get into a saved conditioned.

Those who are predestined to be saved are supplied by God with gifts: a preacher is providently led to that person, God supplies/injects into the mind and heart belief and faith, God supplies/injects repentance into the person’s heart, God supplies/injects confession into the person’s lips, God supplies injects willingness to obey and act on all God’s commands. A person desires to do good because God injected into him the desire to do good. It’s all God’s compulsion. Calvinists call this the “irresistible grace” of God.

How about those not elected and chosen and saved by God’s grace? This question should be asked, according to Calvinism because God is the Sovereign LORD. His sovereignty is like the sovereignty of a potter in his Potter’s Field. A potter makes all kinds pots in different designs and sizes. What the potter chooses to become beautiful and be placed on the display counters is his own discretion. Those pots not chosen are broken and thrown away. Pots don’t complain nor ask questions. Yan ang paliwanag ng Calvinism.

Among Churches of Christ, our position is this: From conception a child is innocent until a certain age of accountability. Because the Devil is the God of this world I Cor. 4:4), the world’s environment soaks and overwhelms a child with evil influences that an individual could not resist but develop lust of the flesh, lust of the eyes and pride of life (1 John 2:16).

Man is depraved but there remains a small flicker of light, small germ of conscience, small germ of reason to start a search for the truth and the good. If truth and goodness competes against the allurements of this world, a person uses his common sense to determine what he desires most. The wonderful design of nature is presented everyday to prove God’s existence. This idea is taught by Apostle Paul in Romans 1:19-32. The prophet Isaiah invited Israel to a session or reasoning and argumentation. (See 1:18)

From the above, we get the idea that there’s a period of innocence from birth to a certain period of maturity when sin is overlooked among children. Then comes the point in time that a person arrives at maturity and that man becomes responsible for his acts. Free will comes into play. Man becomes answerable for his own decisions and acts. So Christ gave the Great Commission to bring the good news of His death, burial and resurrection as the basis of salvation. The blessings and promises of the gospel compete versus the allurements of the world.

The term “dead” is not absolute absence of sensation. The soul is in the person. That soul is not “dead” not a zombie. Death here is separation from God. Read the usage of the term “dead” in Genesis when God said that Adam and Eve would “die” the very day they would eat the forbidden fruit. Read also Luke 15 about the Prodigal Son who was “dead” but came to life. Read the “dead who bury their dead” in Matthew 8:22. Did these dead possess free will? Yes. So out of their free will they decided to do some things.

From these three views presented above, you may choose what is most reasonable and nearest the scriptures.. We will expand the term “dead” in a subsequent article.

born-again, depravity, free-will, God, Jesus Christ, religion

Total Depravity and Free Will

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Views on September 27, 2008 at 4:43 am

BY Eusebio Tanicala

This article presents some questions that one could reflect on when studying the doctrine of total depravity of mankind as compared to the idea of free will of individuals.

1. Did God predestine Lucifer to become Satan and that Satan did not choose nor will to become Satan?

2. Did God predestine some of the angelic hosts into damnation without these angels’ exercising free will?

3. Did God predestined Adam and Eve to disobey without them exercising free will in their decision to eat of the forbidden fruit?

4. Did God predestine a part of humanity to go into the damnation of hell without these individual’s exercise of free will?

5. In the case of Judas becoming a traitor against the Lord Jesus Christ, was it God’s predestination or was it willed by Judas himself and encouraged by Satan?

6. When a couple (husband and wife) genuinely become born-again, do all their children automatically become “totally depraved” at the point in time of conception or point in time of birth?

7. Is there a so-called period of innocence for the human soul from the point in time of conception up to early infancy?

8. At what point in time does a soul become totally depraved?

9. At what point in time does a human being become totally depraved?

10. If Adam and Eve became totally depraved and “dead” at the point in time of disobedience in eating the forbidden fruit in the garden, does it mean that an offspring of the “dead” are also “dead”?

11. Today, there are genuinely born-again “alive” couples, does it follow also that their offspring should automatically become “alive” since the parents are alive? I trust that these questions when reflected upon would help some in our understanding the will of God.

Bible, commandments, teachings

“You have your beliefs, keep yours; others have their beliefs, they keep theirs”

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Views on September 25, 2008 at 6:46 am

By Eusebio Tanicala, Ph.D.

One visitor to our website commented that millions are hell-bound so believers in Christ should band together to save those traveling the highway of death; that I have my own beliefs in the Bible which I should keep to myself and others have their own beliefs which they should keep to themselves; that I should not spend time and effort writing about other’s beliefs.

The history of the Bible does not agree with this thinking. I wished it were true, but the Bible teaches me otherwise. Our Lord Jesus Christ Himself in Matthew 15 indicted the Pharisees and scribes who were teachers of the Jews. Their interpretations and commentaries on the Law of Moses produced traditions which eventually discarded God’s commandments. In Matthew 23, Jesus commented that the Pharisees made a proselyte twice a son of Hell. When the Christ, the rock, who followed the Hebrews in the wilderness supplying them water appeared in flesh as prophesied in Isaiah 53, the Jews didn’t recognize Him because the teachers’ interpretations distorted the facts. The Jews crucified the Messiah, the Lord of glory. This wrong interpretation of Jewish teachers led the Jewish leaders to nail at the cross the Son of God.

Apostle Paul wrote to Timothy, “Meditate on these things; give yourself entirely to them, that your progress may be evident to all. Take heed to yourself and to the doctrine. Continue in them, for in doing this you will save both yourself and those who hear you.” (1 Tim. 4:15-16) The above passages simply warn us that we need to remind each other about the highway we are travelling on. There is a way that seems right but the end is a cosmic hole.

I could not remain silent when other people teach things like the following:

-Jesus Christ is man only and is not deity;
-Christ was not nailed at the cross, but died in Pakistan or Afghanistan;
-Christ wasn’t born of a virgin and didn’t resurrect from the grave;
-Jesus Christ is not the Son of God; He is a son just like any believer;
-There’s no literal hell; hell is on earth, our present life;
-True religion leads souls to hell;
-The pope of Rome is the Vicar of Christ on earth and he is always right;
-God predestined the majority of humanity to suffer in hell;
-Man does nothing for his salvation;
-Polygamy is a Christian virtue;
-Joseph Smith or Felix Manalo or Muhammad or Magliba is the last prophet;
-A preacher in Davao claims that God called him and he is now the Adopted Son of God;
-This preacher in Davao says that only him possesses the true teaching of God;
-There’s no Lord’s Supper of bread and wine.-
etc, etc, etc.

The Jewish teachers missed the mark which resulted to God cutting off the natural branch of the olive tree. Beware, we might be branches of the vine that produce no fruits.

What Do You Really Know about Evolution?

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Sites, Views on September 23, 2008 at 2:13 am

An article from Christian Courier. An interesting read.

Some years ago a few scientists declared that the theory of evolution was as well established as the rotundity of the earth. But evolution is still a theory, not a law. All of the basics of this theory stand in opposition to known science.

What do you really know about evolution? Not much, I assure you! Read More…

Christian living, Ezekiel, free-will, God, NKJV, Old Testament, personal responsibility, religion

Is there Personal Responsibility?

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Views on September 21, 2008 at 4:29 am

By Eusebio Tanicala, Ph.D.

There are many passages that teach personal responsibility as regards decisions and actions of the individual. Let us open to two sections of the Book of Ezekiel. We quote from the NKJV.

Ezekiel 14 v.3 “these men have set up their idols in their hearts.” Who makes the choice of setting up idols?

v.13. “When a land sins against Me by persistent unfaithfulness” and is punished says God. Who decides to do sin?

v.14, 16, 18,21. “…Noah, Daniel and Job, were in it, they would deliver only themselves by their righteousness?”

Did the three righteous men exercise their free will to live a righteous life? Yes. Could their righteousness be imputed upon their sons and daughters? NO. Is there free will here? Yes.

v.11, 23. God ‘s penalty is based on a cause or transgression. Who chooses to transgress? The individual.

Ezekiel 18:

v.4. “The soul who sins shall die.” Does this prove free will and individual responsibility? Yes.

vs. 5-9. Is there free will to do what is just? Is walking in God’s statutes and keeping God’s judgments the free will of a person? Yes. Or is a person forced by God? No, not forced.

vs. 10-13.Does the father pass on to the son his righteousness? No Is there free will on the part of the son? Is the choice of the son his own responsibility? Yes.

vs. 14, 17. “If, however, he begets a son who sees all the sins which his father has done, and considers but does NOT DO LIKEWISE… He shall not die for the iniquity of his father.” Is there free will here? Yes. Is the unrighteousness of the father automatically imputed on the son? No. (So the unrighteousness and the spiritual consequences of Adam and Eve’s sin should not be imputed on their off springs). But are the physical and biological consequences suffered by the off springs? Yes. Just as it is true today. For example, a father drinks and drives and runs over a person on the highway. The guilt and penalty of drunken driving and killing a person is on the father, but not imputed on the son. However the physical consequences like the lack of bread and other physical needs that should be supplied by the father would now be suffered by the son. This is true in the case of Adam and Eve. The spiritual consequence of their sin is not imputed on us. But the withdrawal of the protective shield of God’s grace against physical aging, physical pain, destructiveness of nature like typhoons and bacteria exact their toll on the off spring.

vs. 14-17. Is there free will here? Yes. Does the son reap the fruits of his own deeds? Yes. What is the basis of God’s favorable impression on this son? His avoidance of the prohibited acts and his proactive observance of God’s judgments and statutes.

v. 18. “As for his father, because he cruelly oppressed, robbed his brother by violence, and did what is not good among his people, behold, he shall die for his iniquity.” Is there free will here? Yes.

Does God hold the father personally responsible for his own deeds? Yes. Is the iniquity of the father automatically passed on to the son? No.

v. 19. Does the son bear the guilt of his father? No. What is the basis of God’s favorable acceptance of the son? His acts that are lawful and right, keeping and observing God’s statutes.

v. 20. The son does not bear the guilt of his father; the father does not bear the guilt of his son. Each individual is answerable for his own decision and action. (This should apply in the case of Adam and Eve).

v. .21. Is repentance possible? Yes. Is free will exercised in repentance? Yes.

v. 22. Is there value of free will obedience? Yes, there is. Should a person boast about his obedience? No.

Does his obedience earn and demand reward? No. Reward is volunteered by God. Is it against the nature of God to give rewards to the obedient? No. That is sovereign exercise of grace.

Read vs. 23-32 and observe the exercise of free will in the choice of either direction: obey God or disobey God.

The proof given by the Bible is clear. Proof should not be based on the philosophizing and wild imaginations of some people religious leaders and essayists.

calling, glorification, justification, predestination, regeneration, sanctification

Total Depravity and Degeneration

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Views on September 18, 2008 at 2:13 pm

by Eusebio A. Tanicala, Ph.D.

One reader has asked, “What must a person do to be saved?” Our friend, Nollie Malabuyo, gave the curt answer: “Nothing.” Nollie explains that man is totally depraved. He is dead. A dead person, a corpse, is insensitive and unable to make decisions. So it is God who acts in all stages of salvation process from predestination, to calling, regeneration, to justification, to sanctification, to glorification. God supplies a person the gift of faith, the gift of believing, sends a gift of a preacher to tell him the gospel story, supplies the gift of repentance, supplies the gift of confession, supplies the gift of obedience, supplies the gift of the Holy Spirit to renew the person, supplies the gift of holy living, supplies gifts, gifts, gifts and gifts until a person gets glorified in heaven. Everything is a gift. No exercise of a person’s free will. A person could not exercise his conscience. No free choice.Cannot do anything on his own. But is this position correct? No.

We wished that Randy would ask the question, “What must a person do to be damned?” I imagine that our friend Nollie would give another curt answer: “Nothing.” That would be consistent with his position he takes in what a person must do to be saved and glorified.

But we ask: Who predetermined and who pushed Eve to pick and eat the forbidden fruit in the Garden of Eden? Was the decision of Eve to eat the fruit her own free will? When Adam also ate of the forbidden fruit, was it his free will? Why was God dissatisfied with the decision and act of Adam and Eve? Why were they penalized with suffering and death? I would like Calvinism advocates to answer the above questions.

Now, Adam and Eve’s disobedience brought death unto all human kind. This is understood by Calvinists as literal. The term “death” is a literal dead body. A dead person is a corpse. A zombie. No senses. No life. No vitality. No mind, No decision. From this premise of “death” Calvinism proceeds with its idea of regeneration as discussed in the first article. But we take another direction opposite regeneration. We take the direction of degeneration.

Let’s suppose that there’s predestination. The great majority of human kind is predestined to be damned. That is the theory of Calvinism. But wait, this “dead” majority are individuals. A single “dead” individual has a will, the ability to do bad things. Whose will is this? Where does it come from? If, as premised by Calvin, God predestined everybody, then it follows that the action of this “dead” individual is God’s doing. Because the dead cannot do anything of his own.

But let’s follow the line of reasoning: the “dead” person acts and continues to do evil. Here are some questions to challenge the Calvinist: (1) Is the dead person who continues to think and do evil dead? (2) Does the dead person who thinks and do evil possess a will or ability to make choices? (3) Is this dead person who thinks and do evil responsible for his decisions? (4) Who predestined this dead person to continue playing his role of disobedience?

This dead person continues on his moral degeneration and ends up a burning garbage in the gehenna of Hell. Who programmed him in this degeneration? Logically, following the premises of Calvinism, the programmer is God. Therefore, it is God who wills that a person degenerates into damnation in hell as much as God wills that another person regenerates into glorification in heaven.

But God is angry at the degenerate robot. Well, that’s the illogic of John Calvin! Do you agree with his logic? For my part, I don’t.

Abraham, Bible, Christianity, faith, forgiveness of sins, Old Testament, sacrifice

Abraham’s Series of Faith Demonstrations

In Bible Study Lessons, Views on September 8, 2008 at 12:34 am

By Eusebio Tanicala, Ph.D.

Abram/Abraham demonstrated a series of actions in situations when things were humanly impossible.

Abram was born in Ur of the Chaldeans, a town in the southeastern part of Iraq or within the territory of Kuwait. See Genesis 11:27-32. Following are the events in Abraham’s life:

He was called out from Ur of the Chaldeans to go to a land more than 1300 kilometers away which land he had not previously seen. See Acts 7:2-3; Hebrews 11:8. He was motivated by FAITH and acted on it. He and his family moved to Haran of Syria and eventually to Canaan.
He dwelt in Canaan as in a foreign country living in movable tents but was promised that his descendant would inherit the land much later. This he BELIEVED that God would do in His own time. See Heb. 11:9.
He was promised at the age of 86 and his wife was at the age of 76 that he would have an heir that would issue out from his very own body.This he BELIEVED God would fulfill. See Hebrews 11:11; Genesis 17:19; 18:11-14; 21:1-7.
He was promised descendants that will be as the number of stars in the heavens. This he BELIEVED that God would fulfilll. See Genesis 15:1-6.
When he asked for a sign that this promise of a great number of descendants will be given, God told Abram to offer these sacrifices: a three year old heifer, a three year old she goat, a three year old ram, a dove, and a pigeon. He was moved by FAITH and obeyed as instructed. See Genesis 15:8-11.
A covenant of blessings promised: Abram would be a father of many nations, of many descendants, of many nations, kings among them, inherit the land of Canaan, but sealed by circumcision; Abraham BELIEVED and he and Ishmael and all males in his household were all circumcised even if painful. See Genesis 17:1-27.
At age 99, God promised Abraham that a son would be born to him through Sarah. In Genesis 17:17 Abraham laughed at this promised, but when repeated in Genesis 18:9, he no longer laughed but believed.It was Sarah who laughed. See Genesis 18:9-15.
When Yahweh revealed to Abraham the coming destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, and he haggled about sparing the cities if there were some righteous inhabitants God said He would not destroy the cities if there were some five righteous people. This Abraham BELIEVED and went home. See Genesis 18-19. The following day Abraham returned on top of the hills to view the destruction of the two cities.
When Isaac was born and he had reached 8 days, Abraham circumcised the little boy even if it was painful and bloody. This act showed his FAITH and obedience to a covenant with God. See Genesis 21:1-7.
When Isaac was about 13 years old, God told Abraham to get the boy and offer him as a burnt sacrifice on an altar at Mount Moriah in Jerusalem. We could imagine Abraham talking to himself: Isaac was promised as a seed to produce millions of descendant, but even if he offered this boy as a burnt sacrifice, he told himself that God would somehow raise him up from the ashes so that he could produce the promised descendants. See Hebrews 11:17-19. That attitude of obedience showed this faith.

These series of testings where Abraham displayed an attitude of trust and confidence in Yahweh made him “a friend of God forever.” See James 2:23. James’ conclusion is this: “Do you see that faith working together with his works and by works faith was made perfect?” (2:22).

It is clear that in the life of Abraham, it is not “faith only.” Not “works only.’ It was faith working together with activities in obedience to God’s commands or requirements.

Romans 4:3 refers to Genesis 15:6 and points to Series #4 which is the promise of many descendants as the stars in number issuing from Abraham’s body. Abraham had faith in God and that faith was accounted as righteousness. Yes, it was accounted, listed under the debit column. Any act of faith or belief is accounted, listed under the debit column. But was this faith in the millions of descendants the point when Abraham’s sins were initially forgiven? No! So Romans 4:3 should not be cited by Bible teachers as the point when alien sinners are initially forgiven.

Bible, faith, God, Jesus Christ, justified, religion

The Meaning of “Faith” and “Justified” in Romans 4:1-6

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Views on June 11, 2008 at 6:13 am

by Eusebio A. Tanicala, Ph.D.

Many religious teachers use this passage from the Book of Romans to convince people that sinners are initially forgiven of sins or are saved from past sins apart from any human activity.

Their definition of the term faith is “mental acknowledgement or a mental recognition that somebody or something exists and/or has the power to do something.” If faith that justifies or faith that is reckoned for righteousness merely resides in the mind without obeying God’s commandments, then that would mean forgiveness of sins happens without repentance, forgiveness of sins happens without confession of Christ’s name, remission of sins happens without obeying Christ’s command to be baptized in water, one is pleasing without presenting one’s body as a living sacrifice, one does not need to live a holy life and still hopes to enter heaven the holy abode of God. While these religious teachers deny the essentiality of the above prerequisite actions to salvation, these same religious teachers promote the recitation of the “Sinner’s Prayer” in order to receive Jesus Christ into one’s life. By adding the “Sinner’s Prayer” which is not commanded in the New Testament, these religious teachers necessarily put themselves under our Lord Jesus’ accusatory statement: “Why do you also transgress the commandment of God because of your traditions?” (Matt 15:3b).

The claim that righteousness is obtained through faith apart from any human activity is not warranted by the context of the passage in question. We are going to show the substance of our claim. Let’s analyze the context of the passage.

Firstly, let’s notice Romans 3:21-31 which lays down the premise of the apostle’s argument in Romans 4:1-6. It is clear that apostle Paul analyzed the old argument of the Hebrews that the Abrahamic & Mosaical covenants with God were both sealed and marked by circumcision. The Hebrews understood from Genesis 17:1-27 that God told Abraham that circumcision is the seal of the covenant with Abraham which contained God’s promises. And that his circumcision was reconfirmed by and was incorporated into the Law of Moses as evidenced by Exodus 12:44 and Leviticus 12:3. From these premises, the Hebrew Christians argued that circumcision was essential to becoming a Christian. This issue of circumcision was the main problem in the Jerusalem Conference in Acts 15.

In Romans 4, the Apostle Paul asked the important question which is based on history: Were the promises of Yahweh to Abraham in Genesis 12 when Abraham was about 84 years old and reconfirmed in Genesis 17:1-27 given before or after Abraham’s circumcision? Was it before or after the giving of the Law of Moses? Obviously the answer in both is “before.”

The answer “before circumcision” gives Apostle Paul his strongest argument which states: If the promises made by Yahweh to Abraham were pronounced before circumcision became binding upon Abraham and the same promises were given long before the enactment of the Law at Mt. Sinai, therefore, faith in God is the right attitude NOT circumcision and law keeping. The coming of the Christ, the son of Abraham, is included among the promises. And if the coming and the saving ministry of Christ was promised to Abraham before the circumcision requirement was promulgated, therefore, faith in Christ is the one reckoned for righteousness NOT circumcision.

Secondly, Romans 4:1-6 does not talk about Abraham’s faith as the basis of Abraham’s forgiveness of his sins. Insist on this point. I repeat: Abraham’s sins are not included in the discussion of Apostle Paul in Romans 4:1-6. The passage does not talk about Abraham’s sins. The passage does not talk about Abraham’s faith as the basis of the forgiveness of his sins. But the religious teachers we have mentioned at the beginning of this article insinuate that faith in Christ today is the basis of remission of sins. Romans 4:3 merely states that the believing and trusting attitude of Abraham was “accounted for righteousness.” It means, it is the right thing to do as compared to an attitude of trusting on the merits of circumcision and merits of observing the Law of Moses.

Thirdly, the term righteousness (dikaiosuneen) reckoned to Abraham in Romans 4:3 (also used in James 2:23 when he believed God and offered Isaac at the altar) comes from the same word which is applied to the righteousness (dikaiosuneen) of Jesus’ submitting Himself to the baptism of John. Matthew 3:15b reads, “ … Suffer it to be so now; for thus it becometh us to fulfill all righteousness (dikaiosuneen).” (KJV) Which means that the trusting attitude of Abraham was a righteous act, a correct act in pleasing God as much as the obeying attitude of Jesus Christ in undergoing water baptism was a righteous act, a correct act in pleasing God. In both cases (Abraham’s and Christ’s), we do not talk about remission of sins. So no one should use Romans 4:1-6 and James 2:23 to insinuate that all that is needed in the remission of sins is faith.

Fourthly, the believing/faith of Abraham which was reckoned for righteousness in 4:3,4 should be viewed as a germinal-lineal attitude, an attitude of continuous trusting in God. In the case of NT disciples, it is also a germinal-lineal attitude, an attitude of trusting in Christ’s death, burial and resurrection as the basis of pleasing God. This belief/faith should be understood as a germinal-lineal action (line action, continuing action). Having faith or believing is not a point action. Faith/belief is not a momentary action. Romans 1:17 says that the just, the man with a living faith, always acts out of faith. Everything he does germinates from that faith in God and carries out any action to the very end possessing still that same faith in God. This is the meaning of “faith unto faith” or in other versions it is “faith upon faith.” Sa Tagalog, patong-patong na pagtitiwala. Mula sa umpisa ay may pagtitiwala hanggang sa dulo ng walang hanggan tiwala pa rin.

The idea of a lineal action in faith is sufficiently illustrated in the description of the heroes of faith in Hebrews 11. The germinal faith in one’s mind is perfected in an obedient action. All those heroes of faith mentioned demonstrated their faith with an action.

In the case of Abraham (Heb.11:8-10), one could notice the lineal characteristic of his faith: He was told to get out of Haran, so he and his family walked south to Beer-sheba, a distance of about 800 kilometers; he lived in tents for many years in Canaan until his death; and he was looking forward to arriving in the city built by God.

That lineal characteristic of Abraham’s faith is further demonstrated when God commanded him to offer his son Isaac as a burnt sacrifice at Mt. Moriah. He believed in God, yes, and he perfected that belief in God with activities to fulfill the commandment. When the word from Yahweh came, Abraham was living in Beer-sheba which is southwest of the Dead Sea. He prepared the firewood then he and Isaac hiked some 70 kilometers. He prepared the altar of heaped stones. All these activities took several days. From start to finish, faith/trust was in Abraham’s mind, heart and actions.

This lineal action of faith is the meaning of James’ demand that activity is an element of faith in Christian life. Mere knowledge, mere recognition of the being and state of God is faith/belief, that the demons have, says James. But this kind of faith is not the faith that is reckoned for righteousness.

If faith is lineal, if faith involves activities in obedience to a Master, would it not result to pleasing God by works? We’ll tackle this line of reasoning in another article.

Listen and Be Honestly Informed

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Views on May 12, 2008 at 2:35 pm

Note: Parts of this article is written in the Filipino language.

Mga kasamang mangangaral ang gusto kong kausapin sa paksang ito. Sa mga ilang kursong itinuro ko sa seminaryo at sa isang malakihang lectureship na magtatatlong pong taon na ang nakararaan, ipinaliwanag ko ito pero mga ilan ay ayaw makinig. Paulit-ulit ko na ring ipinaliwanag sa ilang sinulat kong sanaysay. Pero di pa rin maniwala ang iba. Siguro totoo ang kasabihan na mahirap turuan ang matanda nang kabaw.

This is about the use of Amos 6:5 as a proof text by some, including a few Churches of Christ preachers, to directly negate the use of mechanical instruments in the Jewish and Christian worship. We should be careful about our interpretations. Kung mali ang basehan ng argumento lalong titigas ang paniniwala ang nasa kabila ng tinutukoy na isyu. Alam ng mga marurunong sa Old Testament na guro at estudiante na ang Amos 5:23 at Amos 6:5 ay hindi pagbabawal kundi pagtutuwid. Just as 1 Cor. 1:17 is not a prohibition of baptism kundi pagtutuwid na ilagay ang gawaing bautismo sa tamang lugar. The baptism of the Corinthians became reprehensible if they boasted on their relationship with their immersers who were Peter or Apollos or Paul. Gaya din ang 1 Cor. 11:22. Hindi ring pagwawalang saysay sa Hapunan ng Panginoon kundi pagtutuwid sa tunay na kahulugan ng ordinansa. The breaking of bread and drinking of the cup became vain if it was just a part of a drinking and feasting session.

If Amos 5:23 and 6:5 possess the language of the “negative prohibitive” hermeneutical principle among Churches of Christ, then all those mentioned in Amos 5:21-23 (like feast days, sacred assemblies, burnt offerings, grain offerings, peace offerings and songs) and in Amos 6:4-6 (lie on beds of ivory, stretch out on couches, eat lambs from the flock, eat beef, drink wine, anoint selves with ointment or lotion, reclining at fiestas and building palaces) should likewise be prohibited in the Mosaical Dispensation. But I don’t hear these same teachers/students declare the unscripturality of these other items. Bakit ang mechanical instruments of music lang ang pupulutin na bawal mula sa mga talatang ito? The inconsistency is obvious. Such way of reasoning is not a demonstration of intellectual honesty.

The language of Amos 5:23 and 6:5 is the same language in Isaiah 1:10-17. But I’ve not heard the users of Amos 5:23 and Amos 6:5 employ Isaiah 1:10-17 to deny the scripturality of animal sacrifices, in offering blood on the temple altar, assemblies in the temple court, burning of incense, feasts of the New Moon and Sabbaths, and prayers. Yet the style is the same. The listed items were provisions in the Law of God given to Moses. These items were not wrong in themselves. In fact these were commandments of Yahweh. But these became contemptible because of the moral and ethical failures of Judah. Religious life should be interwoven in social justice, the prophet said. Religion is not separated from everyday life.

Let me submit Matthew 23:1-36 as a working comparison in the language of correction and reproof and not prohibition. There are good deeds that are mentioned in this text. They are good and acceptable deeds if practiced correctly. However, these good deeds became negative in the discourse of the Lord because of the incorrect motivation and the inconsistent logic taught by the Jewish teachers.

Notice the pronouncement of woe or condemnation in Matt. 23: 13, 14, 15, 16, 23, 25, 27 and 29. Also note the negating deeds following the good deeds:

1. Good deed: Long prayers, v. 14. Long prayer per se is not a prohibited act. Among Churches of Christ and other religious groups there are overnight prayer meetings. These are longer prayer sessions than the prayers of the Pharisees. Sometimes there are prayers lifted up to the heavens by so-called “prayer warriors” who spend long hours in chapel sanctuaries. We commend their long prayers because we believe they are sincere.

Negating deed: Praying with the aim of devouring widows’ houses. The motivation is essentially wrong.

2. Good deed: Travel land and sea to do mission work, v. 15. This is not a prohibited at. Among Churches of Christ, mission work is highly desirable and intensely prayed for.

Negating deed: Jewish missionaries taught their proselytes traditions of men that make converts doubly sons of hell. See Matt. 15:1-9.

3. Good deed: Recognition of the temple’s sacredness, v. 16.

Negating deed: Making the gold in the temple more sacred and valuable than the temple.

4. Good deed: Recognition of the altar’s sacredness and value, v. 18-20.

Negating deed: Making the gift on the altar more sacred and valuable than the altar.

5. Good deed: Pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin according to the letter of the law, v. 23.

Negating deed: Neglect the observance of justice, mercy and faith – v. 23.

6. Good deed: Cleanse the outside of the cup and plate (washed and well dressed physical bodies), v. 24

Negating deed: Heart is bent on bribery and corruption , v. 24.

7. Good deed: Whitewashing tombs (practiced in the Philippines on All Saints Day), v. 27.

Negating deed: Microbes inside that represent hypocrisy and lawlessness, v. 27,28.

8. Good deed: Build tombs/monuments in honor of prophets, v. 29, 30.

Negating deed: Honoring their forefathers who refused to heed the moral reforms of the prophet.

In Matthew 23, our Lord did not prohibit the good deeds we listed down, but he was saying that these “good deeds” became reprehensible to the Lord because of the immoral and unethical lives of the actors. That is the same kind of hermeneutics in Amos 5:23 and Amos 6:5. The making of musical instruments and the singing to the accompaniment of musical instruments at the time of Amos were good deeds, but these became vain because of the wrong motives and the immoral and unethical social behaviors of the Jewish actors. ©

angels, false prophets, prophets, religion

Of Lying Angels and False Prophets

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Views on April 10, 2008 at 3:12 pm

God is a God of justice and order; whereas, Satan is the God of this world and of chaos in the cosmos. God lays down the rules and guidelines for mankind to follow; whereas, Satan comes around and sows confusion.

The great religions today trace their physical and spiritual roots to Abraham: (a) the Jews and Judaism through Isaac, Jacob, Levi and Moses as prophet and lawgiver; (b) Christendom through Isaac, Jacob, Judah, Perez … King David, Solomon, Rehoboam …Jacob, Joseph the husband of Mary and Jesus the Christ and His teachings were sown around by the apostles; and (c) the Muslims and Islam through Ishmael and Muhammad.

Together, the three streams could well be comprising more than half of the world’s population today. Unfortunately, each stream points to the other two as short of the truth that Yahweh has laid down to follow. Judaism claims and adheres to Moses and the Hebrew prophets; Christianity claims Christ Jesus and the apostles’ teachings abrogated the Mosaical Law ; and Muslims insist on Muhammad as their prophet who claims inspiration by and through the Angel Gabriel. All three believe and invoke angels and prophets as part of their respective economy but there exist great chasms between and among the three streams. And yet all three claim they have the same God who is called various languages as Yahweh, Elohim, El, Eloah, GOD, LORD, Father, Creator, I AM, and Allah among others.

In Islam, the Sunni Muslims differ from the Shiite Muslims. These two streams of Islam battle each other in sectarian violence in Iraq in the early months of the year 2006 continuing even today in the year 2008 as reported in newspapers, television and radio. Some Muslims boast that there’s unity in Islam but that is not true. There are among them who are passive, some moderates, others fundamentalists, and the extreme jihadists.

In Christendom, there are many differing interpretations and conflicting claims among several sects and denominations each one claiming that their respective leaders had communications with angels or felt divine inspiration thereby making them prophets. Let us cite a few examples.

The Pope of Rome claims that he is the Vicar of Christ on Earth so that whatever he pronounces ex cathedra in matters of faith and morals it is authoritative that is equal and many times higher than the canon of the scriptures. At one time the papacy of Rome pronounced as a matter of faith that the earth is flat contrary to the postulates of Copernicus and then put to death Galileo for espousing that the earth is round and revolves around the sun. John Paul II, the Polish pope, publicly apologized for this error of the papacy. This item clearly proves that the Roman Pope is not after all infallible.

Muhammad of Arabia in the seventh century of the Christian Era claimed that the Angel Gabriel gave him instructions. His visions resulted to the establishment of Islam as a religion.

Historians record that Calvin, the Swiss Reformer, made claims that he received some visions from heaven directing him to reform the Roman Catholic Church. Many of his ideas like Total hereditary depravity, Unconditional election, Limited atonement, Irresistible grace, and Perseverance of the saints influenced many non-Romanist theologians who came after him.

Joseph Smith, an American made the claim that an angel instructed him to read the gold plates in New York in the 19th Century of the Christian Era. This visionary established the Church of the Latter Day Saints (Mormon).

Ellen G. White, an American, made the claim that she had heavenly visions which resulted to the establishment of the Seventh Day Adventist Church.

William Miller, an American, claimed that he had visions which became the foundational theories of the Jehovah’s Witnesses.

Felix Manalo, (Filipino) claimed that he is the angel of Revelation 7:2-3 who shouted to the four angels to stop inflicting destruction on earth.

Preachers of Pentecostalism as a general rule, promote the idea that the Holy Spirit continues even in the twenty first century to endow the miraculous spiritual gifts as was done in apostolic times. This results to claims by preachers and church leaders of Pentecostalism that whatever they feel and think about church issues and activities are Holy Spirit inspired.

Apollo Quiboloy, a Filipino, today claims that he received visions from God. He proclaims that the New Jerusalem spoken of in the New Testament is his cathedral in Davao City, Philippines. Many people who listen to his television programs understand that he makes the claim that Jesus of Nazareth is no longer the spokesman of God in the modern world. Apollo Quiboloy claims that he is now the unique adopted son of God and that he (Quiboloy) speaks for God. And that an individual today must go to him to get the antidote to neutralize the sin that is in the individual. Mr. Magliba of Pangasinan had his own claim. So did Mr. Ecleo of Surigao.

This article would like us to focus on lying angels and false prophets. If we are aware that there are lying angels and false prophets, then we become more watchful about who and what is our authority and bases of religious truth that pleases Yahweh. The Apostle Paul believed that behind every human error and confusion there is a spiritual being moving it. He writes, “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.” (Eph. 6:1) Apostle Peter gives a very serious warning and says: “Be sober, be vigilant because your adversary the devil walks about like a roaring lion, seeking whom he may devour.” (1 Peter 5:8) The warning here is: Satan and his angelic host are aggressively sowing confusion and error among people who seek the will of God. Be watchful! Know who you believe and follow. Know what you believe and follow. There are lying angels and false prophets around us today.

Of course we should be aware that there are two general divisions of angels: good angels and bad angels. The good angels are God’s ministers or servants for the salvation of Abraham’s seeds while the bad angels are Satan’s ministers or servants to confuse and mislead mankind. Christ Jesus declared that Satan is the Father of lies (See John 8:44. Before the creation of the material cosmos, Satan and his host of angels rebelled against Yahweh (See Isaiah 14:12-17; Ezekiel 28:11-19; 2Peter 2:4-11; Jude 6). Their final destiny is the hell fire.

Lying angels could appear and sound as good angels (See 2 Cor. 11:13-15). Satan could appear as a beautiful angel dispensing power, wealth, and kingdoms (See Matt. 4:1-10). Or Satan could appear and sound in a very unusual form as the source of wisdom and liberty as in the case of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. (See Genesis 3).

In the Old Testament, there are many instances when lying angels and false prophets competed against good angels and true prophets, for the control of individuals and kingdoms. Read the story in 1 Kings 13. It is about a true prophet from Judah who rebuked and admonished King Jeroboam of the Northern Kingdom who built a rival temple in Bethel of the tribe of Ephraim some twenty kilometers due north of Jerusalem. The prophet was given instructions by Yahweh in verse 9 “You shall not eat bread, nor drink water, nor return by the same way you came.” He was obedient until an older prophet came by and seduced him to do otherwise. The prophet of Judah knew the instructions of God and repeated it to his fellow prophet. But the older prophet said in verse 18, “I too am a prophet as you are, and an angel spoke to me by the word of the Lord, saying, ‘Bring him back with you to your house, that he may eat bread and drink water.’” But this older prophet was lying.

Older men (prophets or preachers) could be moved by jealousy to destroy fellow prophets or fellow preachers by telling lies or misrepresent facts and even invoke angels or their academic degrees to gain credence because they are not the ones honored to undertake a task. Beware! What is best is to stick to what you personally know from the Bible as the instructions of God. So Apostle Paul warned in his Letter to the Galatians (1:8) that even if an angel from heaven comes down and gives another gospel (instructions on anything), stick to what the Holy Spirit has expressly recorded in the canon of the scriptures. Christ, Himself, has warned that scribes and Pharisees of His time were blind guides who led the trusting ordinary Jews. The Jews were led away from the truth.

Gehazi, prophet Elisha’s servant, as recorded in 2 Kings 5 tells of a person’s misrepresentation, lying and greed to exact from the Syrian General Naaman silver bullions and garments. Jeremiah in 4:31 and 14:14 said that duly appointed prophets prophesied falsely setting aside God’s revelations, while priests ruled or judged by their own wisdom not by God’s precepts. Read also Jer. 23:11-40. Prophet Jeremiah comes out very strongly about prophets who have delusions or invent prognostications when he says, “Your prophets have seen for you false and deceptive visions; they have not uncovered your iniquity, to bring back your captives, but have envisioned for you false prophecies and delusions.” (Lamentations 2:14)

Prophet Ezekiel warns in the same way about false prophets of his days in 13:1-16 and 22:25-28. Prophets who pretended to speak for the Lord even if they have not in truth received any revelations. Micah also indicted elders, prophets and priests who served for pay: He declared: “Her heads judge for bribe, her priests teach for pay, and her prophets divine for money. Yet they lean on the Lord, and say, ‘Is not the Lord among us? No harm can come upon us.’” (3:11)

In the New Testament, sufficient warning about false prophets and “false Christ” is given. Every Bible reader is warned to be very careful. Every individual has to decide for himself and choose what is safe and originating from the true God. All the conflicting claims are true! There are blind teachers who lead into destruction the equally blind followers! There are presumptuous Bible teachers! Bible teachers with delusion of grandeur!

Our Lord Jesus Christ is very clear in Matthew 7:21-23 when he gave a picture of the Judgment Day, “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness.’”

Amos 6:5, Bible, instrumentals, music, New Testament, Old Testament

Rethinking Some Old Premises That Are Based On Amos 6:5

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Views on March 29, 2008 at 2:04 am

By Eusebio Tanicala, Ph.D.

It’s from PBC alumni that I’ve heard wrong arguments that are derived from Amos 6:5. So it is fitting that I put this reminder and caution in the PBCAA blog. I especially address the PBC alumni. Please read and analyze this article so that understanding of Amos 6:5 would improve and become correct.

There are two wrong notions related to Amos 6:5 that are used by some PBC alumni in arguing against the use of mechanical instruments of music in Christian worship that need to be corrected: (a) Some presume that the meaning of the term ”invent” in Amos 6:5 means to discover, originate and use something for the first time; and (b) By using Amos 6:5, some presume that King David, out of the presumptuousness and hardness of his heart, introduced musical instruments in the tabernacle worship just as divorce for any reason was insisted by Israel out of the hardness of their heart (Matt. 19:7-8). Both presumptions are incorrect. We shall show why.

It is not true, as some believe, that the term “invent” in Amos 6:5 means “to originate, to discover something new and use it for the first time.” It is a fact that the term “invent” in Amos 6:5 is chashab in Hebrew and it means, “to think, to devise, to design” (Young’s Analytical Concordance, p. 519). Thomas Edison invented the incandescent lamp which means, there was no incandescent lamp before his time. The meaning of “invent” in the case of Edison is NOT the same meaning in the case of Amos 6:5.
It is not true, as some claim, that King David was the first one to use musical instruments. Fact is that thousands of years before King David was born, Jubal and his sons played harps and flutes according to Gen. 4:21. Jubal and sons lived some 4000 years B.C.; whereas, David became king about 1010 B.C
It is not true, as some claim, that Jubal’s sons’ playing the harps and flutes as stated in Gen. 4:21 was a sinful beginning act, for if it were so, then to dwell in tents and have livestock like Jabal in Gen. 4:20 would also be sinful. It would also be sinful for Tubal-cain to instruct others on the use of bronze and iron (Gen. 4:22). It was not sinful for Abraham to dwell in a tent (Gen. 18:1) and not sinful today. We use bronze and iron today and it is not sinful.
It is not true, as some claim, that King David was the first to use musical instruments because hundreds of years before David was born, God Himself sounded the trumpet at Mt. Sinai in the giving of the Decalogue. Read Exodus 19:19; 20:18; Heb. 12:19. The date is about 1450 B.C.
It is not true, as some claim, that King David was the first to invent and use musical instruments because some 500 years before David was born, the Levitical priests in the wilderness were commanded by God to sound the trumpets in various religious events like in the New Moon and Full Moon, over various animal offerings, on the Day of Atonement, etc. Read Num. 10:1-10; 19:1; Lev. 23:24; 1 Chron. 15:24; 2 Chron. 5:12.
It is not true, as some claim, that King David’s rebellious heart caused him to invent musical instruments and used them in the tabernacle. Fact is that God commanded him to design, craft and manufacture the instruments. The palace seer, Gad, as well as the palace prophet, Nathan, approved of the making and use of the musical instruments. Or perhaps the two revealed to King David God’s commandment. Read 2 Chron. 29:25.
It is not true, as some claim, that the use of musical instruments was unacceptable in David’s time because when the young David played the harp in the palace, the distressing spirit that God sent to plague King Saul would depart. Read 1 Sam. 6:14, 23.
It is not true, as some claim, that the use of musical instruments in the OT was started due to David’s rebellious heart and was grudgingly allowed to be used in the tabernacle and temple, just as the Israelites were permitted by Moses to write a certificate of divorce due to the hardness of people’s heart. The parallelism is not true because the first part has no basis. I couldn’t find any verse that suggests that God grudgingly allowed musical instruments to be used in the OT.
It is not true, as some claim, that musical instruments were grudgingly allowed in the tabernacle and temple worship. Fact is God personally instructed Moses to make for himself a trumpet to be used by the priests. (Read Num. 10:1-2). Miriam and the women joyously danced with their timbrels (15:20-21) in celebrating God’s deliverance. King David exultingly encouraged the use of musical instruments in praising God as in 1 Chron. 6:31; 25:7; 2 Chron. 29:27; Psalm 28:7; 33:3; 45:96; 65; 66; 67:75-76; 69:30; 83; 87; 88; 96; 98; 144:9; 149:1: 150; Isa. 42:10. Ezra, the well respected priest and scribe during the return from exile, and the priests in Jerusalem in the restoration of the wall used musical instrument to praise God in the dedication of the wall. (See Ezra 3:8-11). Nehemiah, the governor, praised God with musical instruments (Read Neh.12:35-43). No rebuke in the use of musical instruments could be found in these instances. On the other hand, divorce was never used to praise God. Fact is Malachi denounced the practice of divorce when the Israelites freely discarded their wives (2:16).

Any reactions to the items affirmed in this article are welcomed.

Bible, God, Savior

The Lord God Is My Savior

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Views on March 13, 2008 at 2:31 pm

There are several persons, acts, mental states, provisions through whom and by which forgiveness of sin and salvation from damnation is effected. Please analyze the following passages:

Saved by God (1Tim.1:1;4, 10; Jude 25; Titus 1:3-4; 2:10)
Saved by grace (Eph.2:5; 2Tim.1:9; Acts 15:11; Titus 3:4-5)
Saved by Jesus Christ (Mtt.1:21; Jn3:17; 1Tim.1:15; Heb.7:25)
Saved by mercy thro the washing of regeneration and renewal of the H.S. (Titus 3:5)
Saved by the gospel if we hold fast to it (1Cor.15:2)
Justified by the blood of Christ (Romans 5:9)
Saved by faith (Eph.2:8; Luke 7:50; 8:12; 18:42; Jn 3:16,18)
Saved by the life of Christ (Romans 5:10)
Saved by hope (Romans 8:24)
Saved by calling on the Lord (Joel 2:32; Acts 2:21; 9:14)
Saved by the implanted word (Jas 1:21; Acts 11:14)
Saved by the teachings of Christ and the apostles (1Tim.4:16)
Saved by hearing the words of Christ and believing in the Father (Jn 5:24)
He who believes and is baptized shall be saved (Mk 16:16)
Repent and be baptized and receive remission of sins (Ps 32:5; Acts 2:38 )
Be born again and see the kingdom of heaven (Jn 3:3)
Be born of water and the Spirit to see the kingdom of God (Jn 3:5)
Arise and be baptized and wash away your sins (Acts 22:16;Gal.3:27)
Confess with mouth JC and believe that God raised JC, there is salvation (Rom 10:9,10)
Abiding in the teachings and living righteously and godly until the appearing of Christ (Jn 6:27; 8:31; 12:48-50; 1Jn 2:15; 3:24; 5:2; 2Jn 8-9; Titus 2:11-14; Jas 1:27)

When we study salvation and the means/instruments used by God in effecting it, we should avoid the temptation to pick up one item and set it up against all others or eliminate all others that are brought out from the scriptures. As any big person or theme, that person or that theme could have many facets and phases. So do not pick up one item and ranged it against another. It is not an “either or” situation. Don’t say, “this one and only this one” for it could be many persons and things working together.

We don’t say, “Is the rainbow black or white?” “Is the rainbow green or yellow?” We don’t say, “Is Christ God or man?” No one asks, “Is Christ the truth or the way?” Nor ask, “Is Christ the Savior or the Judge?” We don’t ask, “Is God light or love?” We repeat; It is not an “either or” situation. God and Christ are many faceted persons with multiple attributes. The rainbow has many colors.

One should not ask, “Saved by grace or by God?” Don’t ask, “saved by the death or by the life of Christ?” Never ask, “saved by faith or by hope?” Don’t ask, “Are we saved by calling on the Lord or by being born again?” Don’t say, “by holding fast the gospel or by being baptized?” Never ask, “Are we saved by the implanted word or by abiding in the teachings and living righteously?” Never ask, “Are you saved by grace OR by baptism?”

Rather, we should ask, “Who are the persons we must believe in, what are the facts to accept and believe, what are the emotions to possess in the heart, what changes should happen in life, and what acts of obedience does one undergo in order to appropriate the grace of God according to the scriptures?”

Every Bible reading person accepts the importance of believing in God, Christ, the gospel, the word, the doctrines. Every Bible believer accepts the importance of the blood, suffering and the death of Christ. Every Bible reading person assumes that grace is God’s gift to mankind. Acts like faith, repentance, and calling upon the Lord are necessary responses of a man who wants to enjoy God’s forgiveness.

Power and not time

A most beautiful word that embodies all the beautiful things God feels toward mankind and beautiful things God has done for us to accomplish salvation is the word GRACE. Grace is a very broad term that includes the following: Love, mercy, kindness, Christ’s deity, Christ’s incarnation, Christ’s sufferings, Christ’s death, Christ’s burial, Christ’s resurrection, Christ’s ascension to the right hand of God, the Holy Spirit, the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, the teachings of Christ, Promises of God, Heaven, rain, sunshine, air, angels, friends, relatives, water, the Bible, the church, sickness, accidents, etc, etc. All these are available. Potentially available from God. The power is there. But are all sinners saved at the moment all the above powers/ instruments come into existence? NO, there is no actual salvation yet.

The mere existence of God doesn’t automatically save humanity. Neither would the mere existence of Grace automatically wash away all the sins of mankind. Are we saved by God? Yes. Are we saved by grace? Yes. But we are talking here about the power and availability of God and His grace. Not the time when grace actually becomes operational. Not the time when sin is actually forgiven and forgotten by God. So we should ask the question, “When does God’s grace become operationally effective in actually removing every personal sin?”

When is it operational?

God’s grace in the New Dispensation existed and was offered to mankind in Acts 2 in the year 33 A.D. Were all sinners saved in the year 33 A.D because God’s grace existed? No. Today, God’s grace exists and is offered to all mankind. Are all sinners saved today? No!

When a proponent of “Salvation by grace only” pronounces his belief that “we are saved by grace” we should ask him, “At the moment your statement comes out of your mouth, do you believe that sinners are actually forgiven of their sins?” __ Yes? __ No?

The crucial question to ask and which we should direct to the proponent of “Salvation by grace only” is “At what point in the world’s history, or at what point in a person’s history does grace actually accomplish once and for all the salvation of an individual person?” Sa Tagalog, “Sa anong tuldok ng kasaysayan ng mundo, o sa anong tuldok sa kasaysayan ng isang tao na ang kaloob/grace of God ay huhugas ng kasalanan ng isang tao?” Iti Iloco, “Iti ania a punto iti tiempo ti lubong, wenno kaano a kanito iti biag ti maysa nga individual a ti parabur/grace of God ket punasenna amin a basbasol dayta nga individual?”

The grace of God is a necessary item in the salvation of sinners. But since no one believes and no one teaches that at the moment the grace of God came into existence that all of humanity was saved from sins, there is no point in arguing about God’s grace. The issue is not what grace is and what it can do about sin. Grace is an accepted, necessary factor in salvation. The question is “When is grace operational or when is grace appropriated by an individual for the forgiveness of his personal sins?”

Linear history

Place the following persons, items, and acts along a linear representation of history and identify the precise moment or step when the sins of the world or the sins of an individual are forgiven or washed away: love of God for the world started, mercy of God started, kindness of God started, God created the universe, God promised the coming of the woman’s seed, God gave the law at Mt Sinai, God gave his promises to Abraham, David became king of Israel, Jerusalem was built, Christ was born, Christ was nailed at the cross, Christ died at the cross, Christ was buried, Christ resurrected, Christ ascended to heaven, Day of Pentecost in Acts 2, a person reads his Bible, a person understands that Christ died and was buried and Christ resurrected, a person believes in the mission of Christ as savior, a person repents of his sins, a person goes to church, a person prays for the forgiveness of his sins, a person prays and desires that Christ comes into his life, a person confesses that Jesus is the Christ, a person has faith in Christ and submits to water baptism, a person partakes of the Lord Supper, a person attends church Bible study hour.

When this linear history is laid down and we place the above items on the line, we simplify the question about who, what, the date and time a person is saved from his sins. Until one sits down and does this, the issue remains vague. Until one places the items on a linear representation of history, we will all go on arguing in a circle. (Eusebio Tanicala)

command, Instruments, music, Old Testament, worship

Instruments of Music in Worship in Old Testament Times Were Commanded of God

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Views on March 12, 2008 at 2:25 pm

Lev.23:23-25, “The LORD told Moses to give these instructions to the Israelites, ‘On the appointed day in early autumn, xxxxx You will call the people to a sacred assembly – the Festival of Trumpets – with loud blasts from a trumpet. You must do no regular work on that day. Instead, you are to present offerings to the LORD by fire.” (New Living Translation. Following quotes are from the same version.)

Num. 10:10, “Blow the trumpets in times of gladness, too, sounding them at your annual festivals and at the beginning of each month to rejoice over your burnt offerings and peace offerings. The trumpets will remind the LORD your God of his covenant with you. I am the LORD your God.”

Psalm 81:1-3, “Sing praises to God, our strength. Sing to the God of Israel. Sing! Beat the tambourine. Play the sweet lyre and the harp. Sound the trumpet for a sacred feast when the moon is new, when the moon is full. For this is required by the laws of Israel; it is a law of the God of Jacob.” (This Psalm is assigned to Asaph, a prophet of God. He was an inspired writer. See also 147:7; 149:3; 150:3-5).

1 Chron.25:1-2, “David and the army commanders then appointed men from the families of Asaph, Heman and Jeduthun to proclaim God’s messages to the accompaniment of harps, lyres, and cymbals …They worked under the direction of their father, Asaph, who proclaimed God’s messages by the king’s orders.”

2 Chron. 29:25-30, “King Hezekiah then stationed the Levites at the Temple of the LORD with cymbals, harps, and lyres. He obeyed all the commands that the LORD had given to King David through Gad, the king’s seer, and the prophet Nathan. The Levites then took their positions around the Temple with the instruments of David, and the priests took their positions with the trumpets. Then Hezekiah ordered that the burnt offerings be placed on the altar. As the burnt offerings were presented, songs of praise to the LORD were begun, accompanied by the trumpets and other instruments of David, king of Israel. The entire assembly worshipped the LORD as the singers sang and the trumpets blew, until all the burnt offerings were finished. Then the king and everyone with him bowed down in worship. King Hezekiah and the officials ordered the Levites to praise the LORD with the psalms of David and Asaph the seer. So they offered joyous praise and bowed down in worship.”

Neh.12:24-46, “These were the family leaders of the Levites ….. who stood opposite them during the ceremonies of praise and thanks-giving, one section responding to the other, just as commanded by David, the man of God. x x x x x During the dedication of the new wall of Jerusalem, the Levites throughout the land were asked to come to Jerusalem to assist in the ceremonies. They were to take part in the joyous occasion with their songs of thanksgiving and with the music of cymbals, lyres, and harps. x x x x x They used the musical instruments prescribed by David, the man of God. Ezra the scribe led this procession. x x x x x The two choirs that were giving thanks then proceeded to the Temple of God, where they took their places. So did I, together with the group of leaders who were with me. We went together with the trumpet-playing priests –Eliakim, Maaseiah, Minia-min, , , , and the singers . . . and Ezer. They played and sang loudly and clearly under the direction of Jezrahiah the choir director. x x x x The custom of having choir directors to lead the choirs in hymns of praise and thanks to God began long ago in the days of David and Asaph.”

2Chron.8:14 - This passage teaches that the services arranged by David, including the singers and musical instrument players, were permitted by God.

From the above verses, it is clear that the use of mechanical instruments of music in the tabernacle and temple worship and even in open air religious celebrations, was commanded by God through Moses, Gad, Nathan, David and Asaph who were all seers or prophets. It is not true that instruments of music in Old Testament worship were prohibited. Our passages clearly prove these were used because of God’s commands or their use were instructed through prophets.

Some, including several preachers in the Church of Christ, argue that David invented musical instruments and introduced them in the tabernacle worship out of his own vain imagination and pride This supposition cannot be supported by scriptures and history. Not supported by scholars. It is a position taken by ignorant preachers and writers, some teachers and preachers of churches of Christ included.

How then should we interpret Amos 5:21-25 and Amos 6:4-6? Are the items enumerated prohibited? How do we interpret “You sing idle songs to the sound of the harp, and you fancy yourselves to be great musicians, as King David was”? (NLB)

First, look at the theme of Amos about sin and the judgment of God in the following expressions: “the people of Damascus have sinned again and again, and I will not forget it” (1:3); “the people of Gaza have sinned again and again, and I will not forget it” (1:6); “the people of Tyre have sinned again and again, and I will not forget it” (1:9); “the people of Edom have sinned again and again” (1:11); of Ammon (1.13); of Moab (2.1); “the people of Judah have sinned again and again, and I will not forget it” (2:4-5); “The people of Israel have sinned again and again, and I will not forget it. I will not let them go unpunished any longer! They have perverted justice by selling honest people for silver and poor people for a pair of sandals. They trample helpless people in the dust and deny justice to those who are oppressed. Both father and son sleep with the same woman, corrupting my holy name. At their religious festivals, they lounge around in clothing stolen from their debtors. In the house of their god, they present offerings of wine purchased with stolen money.” (2:6-8)

Continue reading 3 and 4 to see the wickedness and hypocrisy of the Israelites. “I hate all your show and pretense – the hypocrisy of your religious festivals and solemn assemblies. I will not accept your burnt offerings and grain offerings. I won’t even notice all your choice peace offerings. Away with your hymns of praise! They are only noise to my ears. I will not listen to your music, no matter how lovely it is.” All the above acts enumerated are good and are commanded by God Himself, but what is lacking is the sincerity of heart, respect for God and the daily application of moral and social precepts. Israel had the motions and material elements of worship but the people did not have the spirit and the heart in their religion. That made their religious acts vain, condemnable, unacceptable. The religious acts mentioned were not prohibited. God wanted Israel to apply God’s laws in their daily lives so that their religious activities would be acceptable. There’s a negation of one part by God because the people negated the other part. God wanted both aspects to be present in religion. The negation, though, is not a prohibition due to illegality or lack of authority. In the use of figures of speech, this is called “relative negation.”

Illustrations

Sa Tagalog, ito ay tinatawag na pagtutuwid at hindi pagbabawal. Kagaya ng Mateo 5:21-26, for a Jew to bring his gifts at the altar with his heart burdened and stained with hatred against his brother would be unacceptable. Not that the gift/offering is bad in itself. Ganyan din ang kaso sa Mtt. 7:21-23: prophesying in the name of Jesus, casting out demons in the name of Jesus, doing wonderful works in the name of Jesus are not acts that in themselves are wrong. These things become unacceptable because these were not done as the will of the Father but as a means of making a living, or that some other laws of God were scandalously discarded. Pareho rin sa 1 Corinto 1:17. Hindi isinasatabi ang bautismo, pero ang ibig sabihin ay ang bautismo ay walang kabuluhan kung and sentro ng ebanghelio (kamatayan ni Cristo, burial of Christ, resurrection of Christ) ay pababayaan. Ganyan din ang 1 Cor. 11: 17-22. Hindi pagbabawal ng pagganap ng Banal na Hapunan kundi pagtutuwid kung paano isagawa ang Banal na Hapunan with sincerity centered on the death and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ. The activity of breaking bread and drinking the fruit of the vine became unacceptable and condemnable when the Agape Feast (Love Feast) of the early Christians became pasiklaban, pasikatan ng baon, pagbubukod-bukod ng mga magkakabarkada at may nalalasing pa.

Second, we should be consistent. Look at the context. If the portion, “I will not hear the melody of thy viols” (5:23). were a prohibition on the use of instruments of music at the time of Amos, then to be contextually consistent, all others in the context disliked by Yahweh, like feast days, solemn assemblies, burnt offerings, meat offerings, peace offerings, drinking with the use of bowls, eating fatted cows, lying on soft beds, and singing should all be prohibited.

With Authority

Does the passage “and invent for yourselves musical instruments like David” teach that David invented and introduced musical instruments in the tabernacle worship without permission from God? No, this passage does not teach that David invented and introduced the instruments without God’s permission. King David made the instruments as directed by God Himself thro the prophets Gad and Nathan as we have proved in 1 Chron 25 and 2 Chron. 29. The passage tells that the people wanted to imitate King David and be recognized like King David as artistic and worshipful by doing what King David did. King David had a sincere heart in doing what God wanted him to do. So to be pronounced as “doing something as King David did” was an obsession among the Israelites. (see Psalm 51:10,17; 1Kings 3:6; 1 Kings 11:4; 1 Kings 15:3,4,5; 2 Chron. 7:17; 2 Chron. 17:3; 2 Chron. 34:2 ) but the Israelites in Amos’ days were insincere in their hearts. The religious motion was present, but the heart and the spirit were absent. That was the atmosphere that Yahweh discredited.

And that’s what Jesus wanted to correct among the Jews in John 4:24 when he was on earth: worship in spirit and in truth. For worship to be acceptable, magkasabay ang dalawa: Tamang forma at tamang puso’t kaluluwa.

I plead with fellow preachers and church leaders to STOP using Amos 5 and Amos 6 as proofs against the use of instruments of music in worship. Using them as proofs against instrument of music in worship would only reveal ignorance and would help perpetuate wresting of scriptures. Further, a foolish and weak argument against a practice removes the sting of one’s advocacy. ( Eusebio Tanicala, Ph.D.)

prayer, young leaders

Teach Young Prayer Leaders

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Views on March 11, 2008 at 2:25 pm

In prayers for the elements of the Lord Supper, the phrase “Bless, O Lord, this bread (fruit of the vine), so that it will become a symbol of your body (blood)” is becoming very common among many prayer leaders in Ilocano, Tagalog and even in English services. I would imagine that this is the same in Cebuano and other dialects in the Philippines.

There are times that these prayer leaders fail to interrelate the one who is addressed at the beginning of the petition (God, Father, Lord, Powerful Creator) to the one who is asked to grant supplications or favors at the middle of the prayer and to the one who is asked to mediate at the end of prayer.

When the Father is understood to be the one addressed at the beginning of the prayer, many would wonder why the prayer leader used the phrase “Bless, O Lord, this bread so that it will become a symbol of your body.” Obviously the Father did not offer a body for the sins of humanity. Certainly, there is a grammatical error that is committed. Here is where our more experienced evangelists, preachers, older members should teach the young prayer leaders.

There are several ways of looking at the situation where the grammatical error is committed.

Situations in Mind

Situation #1. If the prayer is addressed to the Lord Jesus Christ, the phrase “… your body (blood)” would be consistent and correct. However, the closing part should not be asked “in the name of Jesus.” One could simply close the prayer in this manner: “We trust that You will grant our prayer. Amen.” Considering the over all picture of the prayer, we have the Lord Jesus as the noun (antecedent), the pronoun “your” at the middle part of the prayer refers to the noun (antecedent), and at the end we don’t make Jesus mediate to Himself. Stephen in Acts 7:57-59 directed his prayer to Jesus Christ, our Lord. I won’t object to a Lord’s Supper prayer that is addressed to the Lord Jesus Christ.

Situation #2. If the prayer is addressed to the Father (Lord God, God, Father, Almighty Creator) at the beginning of the petition, the phrase, “… your body (blood)” would be inconsistent and grammatically incorrect at the middle part of the prayer. The Father of the Lord Jesus did not offer a body or blood for the propitiation of humanity’s sins.

Rule of the Pronoun

We should teach our young prayer leaders the rule of the pronoun. In Tagalog Balarila, a pronoun is panghalip. Ibig sabihin, sa halip na ulit-ulitin mo ang pangngalan (noun) in the paragraph, gamitin ang panghalip upang hindi repetitious ang noun. At bago mo gamitin ang panghalip, kailangang ihayag mo muna ang pangngalan sa unahan. Ang pangngalan na yan ang antecedent o ituturo ng panghalip na sumusunod.

Because the noun “Father” is the noun established in case #2, the pronoun “your” is inappropriate referent at the middle part of the prayer. So we have to teach our young prayer leaders not to use this pronoun; instead they should mention Jesus Christ as the one whose body (blood) we are celebrating. And at the end part of the prayer, the prayer leader could name Jesus Christ as the intercessor.

Lord Refers to the Father

One may ask, “Is it scriptural to use the term ‘Lord’ (Apo in Iloco, Panginoon in Tagalog, Ginoo in some dialects, Kurios in Greek) as the person addressed in the beginning of a prayer referring to God the Father?

Certainly, the term “Lord” may refer to the Father. It does refer to the Son also. See Mtt.11:25 and 22:44. Get an unabridged concordance and see how many times “Lord” refers to the Father in the Book of Psalms and in the Book of Revelation. Because the term “Lord” may refer to the Father or to the Son, teach our young prayer leaders to be more specific by identifying the one addressed as “Lord our Father” or “Lord Jesus Christ” and teach them to use pronouns to consistently refer to the antecedent.

No Liturgical Expression

Also, we should remember that the pronoun “your” and the phrase “… your body (blood)” are not inspired, irrevocable liturgical expressions that should dictate who is the antecedent in the beginning of our prayers. Grammatically and logically, it is wrong to establish first a pronoun at the middle of the paragraph and then be governed by that pronoun in determining your antecedent. Rather, we should teach our young prayer leaders to establish the right person we address in the prayer, use the right pronoun at the middle of the prayer, and name the right mediator at the end of the prayer. (Eusebio Tanicala)

Does the Holy Spirit in Person Help the Christian Today? (Series #6)

In Bible Study Lessons, Views on February 27, 2008 at 4:50 pm

by Eusebio Tanicala, Ph.D.

(Editor’s note: The introductory part of this series #6 is the same with that of series #5. This will enable our new readers to understand the premises and direction of our study).
Background

Several decades ago, preachers in the United States exchanged ideas on how the Holy Spirit works in or influences the Christian in the 20th century. We have moved into the 21st century still the questions lingered on. Three questions frequently come out that embody the issues:

1. Is there a personal indwelling of the Holy Spirit in the Christian today?

2. Is there a direct operation of the Holy Spirit in the Christian’s life today, the 21st century?

3. Does the Holy Spirit in person aid the Christian today?

One side declares: “The Holy Spirit indwells the Christian today representatively through the word; the Holy Spirit operates in or influences (aids) the Christian today through the written/oral word only.
The above statement means that the Holy Spirit having inspired the Bible and the canon of scriptures having been completed in its printed/audio form, it is only through the reading/hearing the word that the Christian could be influenced by the Holy Spirit.
The above position is equated to the National Aeronautics & Space Administration (NASA) that trains a crew, writes a survival manual in printed and CD forms and then sends the crew on to the moon. NASA headquarters would watch through powerful telescopes as the spacecraft leaves the earth’s orbit, the landing on the moon and the walk on the moon. But radio communication is cut off. In the spacecraft the faucet doesn’t function, one member couldn’t sleep, the antenna doesn’t function, one booster engine doesn’t ignite. We ordinary people on earth say to ourselves: you astronauts on the moon, you have your survival book, read it to fix yourselves. NASA in its headquarters just sits down and watch anxiously.

The other side of the issue declares: The Holy Spirit indwells the Christian today and the Bible is a source of information/instructions in Christian life and how to go to heaven; in addition to the word, the Holy Spirit in person may help, aid, influence, guide, encourage, nudge, prompt the Christian towards a higher level of spiritual life and service.

The above position is equated to the NASA that trains a crew, writes a survival manual in printed and CD forms and then sends the crew on to the moon. NASA headquarters would watch through powerful telescopes as the spacecraft leaves the earth’s orbit, the landing on the moon and the walk on the moon. All the while radio contact and TV image exchanges are maintained. If the crew wants to ask info how to fix the faucet, if a crewmember wants to solve his lack of sleep, if one booster engine doesn’t function, the crew could radio back to earth and get help from NASA headquarters. NASA headquarters would tell the crew to check their survival manual, but in addition to the manual on board, NASA experts in various disciplines would radio back their analysis and instructions about the problems. We ordinary people on earth would say to ourselves: you astronauts on the moon, you have your book, read it AND get additional help from NASA HEADQUARTERS because the experts are anxious to help.

Background ng kakulitan natin

Recently some preachers in the Philippines became more outspoken in their advocacy over the issues being discussed here which resulted to two formal discussions, one in Pangasinan and the second in the MetroManila area. The affirmative of the second proposition below approached brother Jovencio Gundayao that if he (Jovencio G) or his associates would not debate him in the issues, the proponent of the second proposition would denounce as FALSE TEACHERS all who disagree with him. When Joven G asked brother Santiago Sameon II to represent his side, Santiago S readily accepted the debate challenge and he affirmed the first proposition and negated the second proposition.

The propositions discussed in the two meetings were:

(1) Resolved: The scriptures teach that the Holy Spirit dwells in the Christian personally and directly together with the word of God.

(2) Resolved: The Bible teaches that the Holy Spirit indwells, influences and guides the Christian today through the word of God only.

Kung ilan sa aking mga kapatid ay nakukulitan sa aking mga pagpapaliwanag sa isyung ito, ako ay humihingi ng paumanhin. Hiling ko lang na inyong pagsabihan ang partidong nagbigay ng threat to denounce as FALSE TEACHERS all those who disagree with him. Ang partidong nagbigay ng threat of denunciation ay handang hatiin din ang mga kongregasyon sa mga isyung kanyang itinuturo. Kailangan patigilin din ninyo siya sa kanyang gawaing ito. At kung nakukulitan na kayo huwag na ninyo ako bibigyan ng topiko sa mga lectureships and preachers forum ukol sa persona at gawain ng Espiritu Santo. Kapag mapatigil na ninyo ang partidong ating natukoy sa taas, kaagad din ako titigil magpaliwanag sa paksang ito.

Basic Assumptions

In the study of the main title, the following presumptions should always be in the student’s mind so that he could readily collate the complex information about the Holy Spirit’s workings.

First, by extension, this corollary question should also be asked: “Does God in person help the Christian today?” This idea comes out from our belief in the Trinity. All three persons share the same attributes.

Second, another question should go with the main title, “Does the Holy Spirit help the Christian today through the oral/written word only as processed by the brain of the person in need?”

Third, still another question goes with the first questions: “Does the Holy Spirit in person help the Christian today through other means above and/or beyond the oral/written word, the Bible, but not contrary to it?”

Fourth, this study presumes our acceptance of God’s attributes as defined by dogmatic theology: omnipotence, omniscience, omnipresence, transcendence, immanence, unity, trinity, indivisibility, infinity, pure spirit.

Delimitation and Definition of Terms

This study temporarily avoids discussing the term “indwelling” and uses the terms: help, aid, work, influence, guide, nudge, prompt, encourage. By clarifying first the area of help and influence, it will be easier later to deal with the term “indwelling.”

This study is delimited within the Churches of Christ’s belief in the “Ordinary Measure” of the Holy Spirit. The “Full Measure” given to Jesus during His earthly ministry and the “Baptismal and Miraculous Measure” given to the Apostles and those they laid hands on should not be invoked in this discussion. Pentecostalism and claims of prophethood/angelship are excluded.

Terms which are central in this study are person, persona, personality, and personal.

(1) Person, or personality (persona) of the Holy Spirit refers to His having “a self-consciousness, a Being that has intelligence, with the power of choice,” (Moss, The Christian Faith: An Introduction to Dogmatic Theology, 24).

(2) Personal, refers to the self-willing act of a person or his direct influence in activating another person or something so that there’s an effect upon another. It is opposed to an impersonal thing/idea either read or heard that is processed by the brain of the Christian as the basis of what a person may enjoy for himself, a belief he might profess, or a command he undertakes.

The Problem Stated

The 21st century Christian asks: “In my daily life, where do some material or spiritual gifts and blessings come from, where do some actions originate, where do some enlightenments come from, where do I derived some ideas and conclusions?”

The Christian sees several avenues and asks:

(a) Shall I read my Bible and process the information with my brain?
(b) Am I limited to reading my Bible as source of blessings, gifts, information and instructions?

(c) Will blessings, gifts, information, instructions, joy be limited according to the limitations of my brain to process biblical information that I read from the Bible?

(d) Do blessings, gifts or imperceptible nudging sometimes come direct from the person of the Holy Spirit?

(e) Do items come thro some persons or things that are moved by the Holy Spirit Himself?

(f) Are there blessings, gifts or information that reside in nature that could help or aid the Christian today which are not written in the Bible but are not contrary to the Bible?

(g) Do items sometimes come from/through a combination of two or more of the above?

Purposes of this Study

First, it seeks to improve our biblical knowledge and teach us to avoid committing glaring inconsistencies in interpretation among Churches of Christ preachers.

Second, it seeks to promote our prayer life with the enhanced awareness of the Holy Spirit’s presence, promptings and help in our daily Christian life.

Third, it seeks to promote more spirituality with our awareness of the Holy Spirit’s workings in our daily Christian life.

Fourth, it promotes stronger dependence upon God with the awareness that God in person is personally assisting the Christian today.

Fifth, it promotes Christian humility in that wisdom, strength, victory in life, success and service are not solely produced by the mental and physical prowess of the individual Christian, but that much of these come as grace from a personal God based on the humility and submissiveness of a Christian heart.

Proposition for series #6: The Holy Spirit in person can do many things (help, influence, guide, nudge, prompt, or encourage the Christian) which the word, the Bible, cannot do.

Proponents of the “through the word only as processed by the brain” ask this question: “What can the Holy Spirit do which the word can’t do?” In effect they would like to say that there’s no need for the personal attention and personal help of the Holy Spirit because everything is done by and/or through the word only, the Bible, when read or heard by the Christian.

In this series #6 we basically talk about persona, ability, omnipotence, omnipresence, omniscience, and holiness.

Here are some suggested questions to help us make a decision which claim is more reasonable:

Approximately in what year in the Christian era did the Holy Spirit remove from the earth His personal presence, omnipresence, omnipotence and omniscience and leave behind His concern, work, and care for Christians? ___
Approximately in what year in the Christian era did the Holy Spirit start to help, aid, influence, guide, prompt, encourage Christians through the oral/written word only as processed by the individual’s brain? ___
The Holy Spirit garnished the heavens and He understandably would have a share in controlling the expanding galaxies. Question: Does the Bible exert any control in the overall maintenance of the entire material cosmos like in the gravitational pull, expansion of the galaxies, explosions of the supernovas, dying and birthing of stars, and the swing of asteroids and comets in space? __
The Holy Spirit is and does remain a member of the Godhead. Question: Is and can the word, the Bible, remain a member of the Godhead? __
The Holy Spirit is and does remain a persona. Q: Can the word, the Bible, become/remain a persona? __
The HS does have emotion and will. Question: Can the word, the Bible, have emotion and will? __
The HS does have emotion and can be actually grieved. Q: Does the word, the Bible, have emotion and can the word be actually grieved today? ___
Psalm 139:7 says that anywhere in the cosmos a person could possibly go the HS actually is there. Q. Can the word, the Bible, today actually go to these places, too? ___
The HS in person is actually and literally in heaven (139:8). Q: Can the word, the Bible, actually and literally be in heaven today? ___
The HS can go to Sheol. Question: Can the word, the Bible, go to Sheol? ___
The HS is God and God could go to the uninhabited outer fringes of the millions of galaxies and influence these heavenly bodies. Q: Can the word, the Bible, go into those outer fringes of the millions of galaxies and influence these stars? ___
When a Christian flies from the Philippines and goes west to work in Mecca, Saudi Arabia, the HS can go before that person. Q: Can the word, the Bible, go before the person in Mecca, Saudi Arabia? ___
When a Muslim flies from the Philippines and goes west to work in Mecca, Saudi Arabia, the HS can go before him. Q: Can the word, the Bible, go before the Muslim in Mecca, Saudi Arabia? ___
Psalm 139:11 says that the HS can make a pitch black night into clear day. Q: Can the word, the Bible make a pitch black night into clear day? ___
Psalm 139:13-15 says that God (HS included) form and develop the organs and body parts of a fetus in the womb of Christian, Muslim, and atheist mothers. Question: Can the word, the Bible form and develop the organs and body parts of a fetus in the womb of Christian, atheist and Muslim mothers? ___
The HS can help a Christian who has diarrhea while working in Mecca, Saud Arabia. Q: Can the word, the Bible, help the Christian who has diarrhea in Mecca, Saudi Arabia? ___
The HS can help a Christian who is physically sick and hospitalized in Mecca, Saudi Arabia. Q: Can the word, the Bible, help the Christian in this sickness while in a hospital in Mecca, Saudi Arabia? ___
The HS being God can imperceptibly help Muslim doctors and nurses treat a hospitalized Christian in Mecca, Saudi Arabia. Q: Can the word, the Bible, help Muslim doctors and nurses in treating a hospitalized Christian in Mecca, Saudi Arabia? ___
The HS can help a comatose Christian who is hospitalized in Mecca, Saudi Arabia. Q: Can the word, the Bible, help a comatose Christian who is hospitalized in Mecca, Saudi Arabia? ___
We often pray to God that He (HS included) would bless medicines that are used to treat a comatose Christian for extraordinary efficacy. Question: Can the word, the Bible, bless medicines that are applied on a comatose Christian? ___
Psalm 139:16 says that God (HS included) can see the unborn fetus in a mother’s womb. Q: Can the word, the Bible, see the unborn fetus in a mother’s womb? ___
Psalm 139:16 says that God (HS included) can make a record book on the destiny of people. Q: Can the word, the Bible, write a book that records the destiny of people? ___
The Holy Spirit knows the mind of God. Q: Can the word, the Bible, know the mind of God?___
The HS can be sinned against like in Acts 5. Q. Can the word, the Bible, be sinned against? ___
The HS can be sinned against like in Acts 8 and the sin could be forgiven by the HS. Q: Can the word, the Bible, be sinned against and can the word, the Bible, forgive sins? ___
The HS can be addressed in a prayer for a person’s forgiveness. Question: Can the word, the Bible, be addressed for the forgiveness of sins? ___
From heaven to earth God (HS included) could telecommunicate messages, teletransport matter from one place to another, and telecommand nature to act. Q: Can the word, the Bible, telecommunicate messages, teletransport matter from one place to another, and telecommand nature to act? ___
The HS being an omnipotent God has wisdom and emotion, and by His own choice, could telecommunicate wisdom and emotion to the human brain. Q: Can the word, the Bible, by its own choice, telecommunicate wisdom and emotion to the human brain? ___
The HS can transmit the groaning prayers of Christians from earth to the Father in heaven. Q: Can the word, the Bible, transmit the groaning prayers of Christians from earth to the Father in heaven? ___
God (the HS included) being omniscient and omnipresent, knows all the sciences and technologies in the fields of astronomy, geology, nuclear medicine, microbiology, surgery, teletransportation, telecommunications, petrology, cellphone operation and repair. Question: Can the word, the Bible, know all these sciences and Technologies today? ___
Sometimes we hear Christians pray that God (the HS included) would spare some relatives in typhoon ravaged areas and we believe that some providential care is given even if we believe that God is in heaven above. Question: Can the word, the Bible, extend some providential care in distant ravaged areas? ___
God gives the HS after a person obeys (Acts 5:32). Q: What is the word that is given by God to a person after he obeys? ____
The Spirit intercedes for a Christian (Rom. 8:26). Q: Can the word intercede for you today? ___
Christians invoke the love of the Spirit in prayers. Q: Does the word possess love that we could invoke in our prayers today? ___
The HS in person justifies (1 Cor.6:11). Q: Does the Bible by itself justifies you today? ___
The HS has the word as His sword (Eph. 6:17). Q: Does the word have the word as its sword? ___
The HS can be quenched (1Thes 5:19) by a misbehaving disciple. Q: Can the word be quenched? ___
The HS participated in the eternal offering of Christ for our salvation (Heb. 9:14). Q: Did the word participate in offering Christ for our salvation? ___
The HS possess the emotion of jealousy (James 4:5). Q: Does the word possess the emotion of jealousy today? __
Thro the help of and by the instrumentality of the HS as a person (2Tim.1:13-14), the Christian is encouraged to keep the pattern of sound words which are the words of Jesus Christ and the doctrine of godliness (see 1 Tim.6:3). Q: Does the word provide the aid to a Christian in keeping the word? __
The persona of the HS exists and acts as a person apart but in conjunction with the word (2 Tim. 1:13-14). Question: Does the word exist and act as a person apart from the word but in conjunction with the word? ___

After answering all the above questions, you are now ready to make a firm answer to the query: What can the Holy Spirit do that the word, the Bible, cannot do? Another way of asking the question is: Can the word, the Bible, do all what the Holy Spirit in person can do? If there are many things that the Holy Spirit can do which the word, the oral/read Bible, could not do, then we could safely say that there’s a need for the Holy Spirit persona helping us. ©

▶ View 3 Comments

The Deity and Incarnation of Satan

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Views on February 18, 2008 at 4:10 am

by Eusebio Tanicala

By showing first the deity and incarnation of Satan, the Serpent, we can more easily neutralize the stock objections and explanations of the Iglesia ni Cristo-Manalo preachers regarding the deity and incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ than if we disregard this step. Manalista preachers sneer at the idea of deity becoming a man of flesh and blood. But have you ever heard any Manalista sneering at an archangel becoming a snake of flesh and bones?

Pagaralan ninyo na kilatisin ang lahat na anggulo ng pagka – espiritu ni Satanas. At ang kanyang pagiging ahas na may buto’t laman. Kung ano ang pangangantiyaw at panglalait ng mga mangangaral na ito, baligtarin ninyo at ituon sa kalagayan ni Satanas.

The English word God or deity is Dei in Latin, and is Dios in Spanish, and is Theos in Greek. The TH is one letter called the theta in the Greek alphabet.

In talking with preachers or members of the Iglesia ni Cristo-Manalo, a study of Satan’s essence and activities should be a first consideration before discussing the essence and activities of Christ. Or a parallel study of the essence and activities of both should be made.

The purpose of analyzing Satan’s essence and activities is to show the INC-Manalo preacher that his line of reasoning in objecting to, nay even deriding the deity-incarnation of Christ, disappears when it is applied on the deity-incarnation of Satan, the Serpent.

For example, the INC-Manalo preacher combines John 4:24, “God is a spirit…” and Luke 24:39, “for a spirit has no flesh and bones, as you see me have,” ergo, Christ is no God because he was in flesh and bones.

Try to apply the same thought process above in the deity and incarnation of Satan, and you’ll find that the INC-Manalo preacher evading, quibbling or even creating trouble to draw you away from the issue and away from his line of reasoning.

In this parallel analysis of Satan and Christ, letter A is for Satan and letter B is for Christ.
(1) A. Did Satan the spirit person create all things? __
B. Did Christ the spirit person create all things? __
(2) A. Did Satan the spirit person create Christ the spirit person? __
B. Did Christ the spirit person create Satan the spirit person? __
(3) A. Did Satan the spirit person become a rock before he became a serpent? __
B. Did Christ the spirit person become a rock before he became a man? __
(4) A. Did Satan the spirit person become a serpent of flesh and bones? __
B. Did Christ the spirit person become a man of flesh and bones? __
(5) A. Did Satan the spirit person enter a body of a serpent? __
B. Did Christ the spirit person enter a body of a man? (Heb. 10:5) __
(6) A. Is Satan a snake? __ Can Satan become a snake? ___ Is a snake Satan? ___
B. Is Christ a man? ___ Can Christ become a man? ___ Is a man Christ? ___
(7) A. Is the material flesh-bones snake Satan? __
B. Is the material flesh-bones man Christ? __
(8) A. Was the material flesh-bone Satan one and the same as the spirit person Satan? __
B. Was the material flesh-bone Christ one and the same as the spirit person Christ? __
(9) A. Did the spirit person Satan exist before the existence of the flesh-bones Satan? __
B. Did the spirit person Christ exist before the existence of the flesh-bones Christ? __
(10) A. Sino ang gumawa o naghanda ng katawang ahas na pinasukan ni Satanas? __
B.Sino ang gumawa o naghanda ng katawang tao na pinasukan ni Cristo? (Mt. 1:20) __
(11) A. Ang Satanas ba na pumasok sa katawang ahas ay ahas rin? __
B. Ang Cristo ba na pumasok sa katawang tao ay tao rin? __
(12) A. Ang ahas ba na pinasukan ni Satanas ay Satanas? __
B. Ang tao ba na pinasukan ni Cristo ay Cristo? __
(14) A. Ang katawang ahas ba na pinasukan ni Satanas ay Satanas din? __
B. Ang katawang tao ba na pinasukan ni Cristo ay Cristo rin? __
(15) A. Did Satan the spirit person enter the cell in the mother serpent’s womb? __
B. Did Christ the spirit person enter the cell in mother Mary’s womb? __
(16) A. Did Satan the spirit person stay in the serpent egg until hatching date? __
B. Did Christ the spirit person stay in the human fetus until birthing date? __
(17) A. Was Satan the spirit person born of a serpent mother? __
B. Was Christ the spirit person born of a human mother? __
(18) A. Was the chemical composition of the Serpent Satan of flesh/bones same as the chemical composition of the spirit person Satan? ___
B. Was the chemical composition of the human Jesus of flesh/bones same as the chemical composition of the spirit person Christ? ___
(19) A. Was the essence of the Serpent Satan of flesh-bones same as the essence of the spirit person Satan?___
B. Was the essence of the human Jesus of flesh-bones same as the essence of the spirit person Christ? ___
(20) A. Was Satan the spirit person one and the same as the Satan of flesh and bones? __
B. Was Christ the spirit person one and the same as the Christ of flesh and bones? __
(21) A. Was the flesh-bones Satan a spirit? __
B. Was the flesh-bones Christ a spirit? __
(22) A. Can the Spirit Satan become a snake of flesh and bones? __
B. Can the Spirit Christ become a man of flesh and bones? __
(23) A. In the grammar of Satan, the verb BE is not the same as the verb BECOME. Right? __
B. In the grammar of Christ, the verb BE is not the same as the verb BECOME. Right? __
(24) A. Ang kabuuan ba ni Satanas ay siya ring kabuuan ng ahas? __
B. Ang kabuuan ba ni Cristo ay siya ring kabuuan ng tao? __
(25) A. Ano ang porsiento ng ahas sa Eden na tawagin Satanas? __
B. Ano ang porsiento ng tao sa Bethlehem na tawaging Cristo? __
(26) A. When Satan became a snake of flesh and bones, was he a snake no more, no less? __
B. When Christ became a man of flesh and bones, was he a man no more, no less? __
(27) A. Was Satan the spirit person older than the flesh-bones Satan in Eden? __
B. Was Christ the spirit person older than the flesh-bones Christ in Bethlehem? __
(28) A. Was Satan the spirit person older than the mother serpent that laid the egg? __
B. Was Christ the spirit person older than mother Mary that birthed the child? __
(29) A. When the Serpent Satan was at the Garden of Eden, did he eat and drink? __
B. When the man Christ Jesus was at Canaan, did he eat and drink? __
(30) A. When the Serpent Satan was at Eden, did he sleep? __
B. When the man Christ Jesus was in Canaan, did he sleep? __
(31) A. If the Serpent Satan of flesh-bones was laid as an egg and then hatched, ilan ang mga kapatid niya? __
B. The man Christ Jesus of flesh-bones was born, ilang ang mga kapatid niya ayon sa Marcos 6:3? ___
(32) A. When the Serpent Satan of flesh-bones died, did Satan the spirit person die? __
B. When the man Christ Jesus of flesh-bones died, did Christ the spirit person die? __
(33) A. When the head of Serpent Satan of flesh-bones was crushed, did Satan die? __
B. When the heel of the man Christ Jesus of flesh-bones was bruised, did Christ die? __
(34) A. When the head of Serpent Satan of flesh-bones was crushed, did Satan the spirit person die? ___
B. When the heel of the man Christ Jesus of flesh-bones was bruised, did Christ the spirit person die? ___
(35) A. When the Serpent Satan of flesh-bones died, was the body buried? __
B. When the man Christ Jesus died, was the body buried? __
(36) A. Where is the body of the Serpent Satan presently located? __
B. Where is the body of the man Christ Jesus presently located? __
(37) A. Because Satan of flesh-bones is no longer in the material form, did Satan die? __
B. Because Christ of flesh-bones is no longer in the material form, did Christ die? __
A. Sapagkat wala na si Satanas na ahas na pisikal, wala na ba si Satanas na ahas? ___
B. Sapagkat wala na si Cristo na taong pisikal, wala na ba si Cristo na tao? ___
(38) A. Was the body of the Serpent Satan resurrected? __
B. Was the body of the man Christ Jesus resurrected? __
(39) A. Does Satan presently exist in the essence he existed before he became a flesh-bones serpent? ___
B. Does Christ presently exist in the essence he existed before he became a flesh-bones human? ___
(40) A. Did Satan the spirit person bring with him in the heavenly realms a resurrected flesh–bones body? ___
B. Did Christ the spirit person bring with him in the heavenly realms a resurrected flesh–bones body? ___
(41) A. Does Luke 24:39 prohibit and limit Satan the spirit person from becoming flesh and bones? __
B. Does Luke 24:39 prohibit and limit Christ the spirit person from becoming flesh and bones? ___
(42) A. Does Luke 24;39 prohibit and limit Satan the spirit person from taking the form of flesh and bones? __
B. Does Luke 24:39 prohibit and limit Christ the spirit person from taking the form of flesh and bones? ___
(43) A. Noong nawala sa lupa ang Satanas na ahas, nawala na ba si Satanas sa lupa? __
B. Noong nawala sa lupa ang Cristo na tao, nawala na ba si Cristo sa lupa? __
(44) A. According to 2 Cor. 4:4, Satan is the GOD OF THIS WORLD, do you believe this? __
B. According to 1 John 5:20, Christ is THE TRUE GOD AND ETERNAL LIFE, do you believe this? __
(45) A. When Satan took the form of a snake, was the whole being of Satan in the body of the snake? __
B. When Christ took the form of a man, was the whole being of Christ in the body of the man? __
(46) A. Because Satan is GOD (deity) OF THIS WORLD, did the whole deity of Satan dwell in the snake? (2 Cor. 4:4).
B. Because Christ is GOD (deity), did the whole deity dwell in the man? (See Col. 1:19; Col 2:9; Heb. 10:5)
(47) A. The Greek word Theos is capital theta in the Greek text and refers to Satan in 2 Cor. 4:4. Agree? __
B. The Greek work Theos is capital theta in the Greek text and refers to Christ in 1 John 5:20. Agree? __
(48) A. Satan the spirit person took the form of a snake of flesh-bones when he kidnapped Eve. Agree? ___
B. Christ the spirit person took the form of a man of flesh-bones when he ransomed the children of Eve. (Mk 10:45; 1 Tim.2:6; 1 Cor. 6:20). Agree?
(49) A. Satan the spirit person is GOD OF THIS WORLD is the Satan of flesh and bones, right? ___
B. Christ the TRUE GOD AND ETERNAL LIFE is the Christ of flesh and bones, right? ___
(50) A. Satan the spirit GOD OF THIS WORLD can become Satan of flesh and bones, right? ___
B. Christ the spirit TRUE GOD AND ETERNAL LIFE can become Christ of flesh and bones, right? __
(51) A. Is there anything funny/impossible in Satan the spirit person becoming a material snake of flesh and bones? __
B. Is there anything funny/impossible in Christ the spirit person becoming a material man of flesh and bones? ___
(52) A. Guapo ba si Satanas na personang espiritu na naging buto’t laman na ahas? __
B. Guapo ba si Cristo na personang espiritu na naging buto’t laman na tao? __

Do you find the INC-Manalo preacher or member honest in answering the questions about Satan’s deity and incarnation? __

Does the Holy Spirit in Person Help the Christian Today? (Series #5)

In Bible Study Lessons, News, Views on January 23, 2008 at 12:47 am

by Eusebio Tanicala, Ph.D.

Background

Several decades ago, preachers in the United States exchanged ideas on how the Holy Spirit works in or influences the Christian in the 20^th century. We have moved into the 21^st century but the questions lingered on. Three questions frequently come out that embody the issues:

1. Is there a personal indwelling of the Holy Spirit in the Christian today?

2. Is there a direct operation of the Holy Spirit in the Christian’s life today, the 21^st century?

3. Does the Holy Spirit aid the Christian today?

The above statement means that the Holy Spirit having inspired the Bible and the canon of scriptures having been completed in its printed/audio form, it is only through the reading/hearing the word that the Christian could be influenced by the Holy Spirit.

The above position is equated to the National Aeronautics & Space Administration (NASA) that trains a crew, writes a survival manual in printed and CD forms and then sends the crew on to the moon. NASA headquarters would watch through powerful telescopes as the spacecraft leaves the earth’s orbit, the landing on the moon and the walk on the moon. But radio communication is cut off. In the spacecraft the faucet doesn’t function, one member couldn’t sleep, the antenna doesn’t function, one booster engine doesn’t ignite. We ordinary people on earth say to ourselves: you astronauts on the moon, you have your survival book, read it to fix yourselves. NASA in its headquarters just sits down and watch anxiously.

The above position is equated to the NASA that trains a crew, writes a survival manual in printed and CD forms and then sends the crew on to the moon. NASA headquarters would watch through powerful telescopes as the spacecraft leaves the earth’s orbit, the landing on the moon and the walk on the moon. All the while radio contact and TV image exchanges are maintained. If the crew wants to ask info how to fix the faucet, if a crew member wants to solve his lack of sleep, if one booster engine doesn’t function, the crew could radio back to earth and get help from NASA headquarters. NASA headquarters would tell the crew to check their survival manual, but in addition to the manual on board, NASA experts in various disciplines would radio back their analysis and instructions about the problems. We ordinary people on earth would say to ourselves: you astronauts on the moon, you have your book, read it AND get additional help from NASA HEADQUARTERS because the experts are anxious to help.

Recently some preachers in the Philippines became more outspoken in their advocacy which resulted to two formal discussions, one in Pangasinan and the second in the Metro Manila area.

The propositions discussed in the two meetings were:

(1) Resolved: The scriptures teach that the Holy Spirit dwells in the Christian personally and directly together with the word of God.

(2) Resolved: The Bible teaches that the Holy Spirit indwells, influences and guides the Christian today only through the word of God.

Basic Assumptions

In the study of the main title, the following presumptions should always be in the student’s mind so that he could readily collate the complex information about the Holy Spirit’s workings.

First, by extension, this corollary question should also be asked: “Does God in person help the Christian today?” This idea comes out from our belief in the Trinity. All three persons share the same attributes.

Second, another question should go with the main title, “Does the Holy Spirit help the Christian today through the oral/written word only as processed by the brain of the person in need?”

Third, still another question goes with the first questions: “Does the Holy Spirit in person help the Christian today through other means above and/or beyond the oral/written word, the Bible, but not contrary to it?”

Fourth, this study presumes our acceptance of God’s attributes as defined by dogmatic theology: omnipotence, omniscience, omnipresence, transcendence, immanence, unity, trinity, indivisibility, infinity, pure spirit.

Delimitation and Definition of Terms

Terms which are central in this study are person, persona, personality, and personal.

(1) Person, or personality (persona) of the Holy Spirit refers to His having “a self-consciousness, a Being that has intelligence, with the power of choice,” (Moss, The Christian Faith: An Introduction to Dogmatic Theology, 24).

(2) Personal, refers to the self-willing act of a person or his direct influence in activating another person or something so that there’s an effect upon another. It is opposed to an impersonal thing/idea either read or heard that is processed by the brain of the Christian as the basis of what a person may enjoy for himself, a belief he might profess, or a command he undertakes.

The Problem Stated

The 21^st century Christian asks: “In my daily life, where do some material or spiritual gifts and blessings come from, where do some actions originate, where do some enlightenments come from, where do I derived some ideas and conclusions?”

The Christian sees several avenues and asks:

a. Shall I read my Bible and process the information with my brain?

b. Am I limited to reading my Bible as source of blessings, gifts, information and instructions?

c. Will blessings, gifts, information, instructions, joy be limited according to the limitations of my brain to process biblical information that I read?

d. Do blessings, gifts or imperceptible nudging sometimes come direct from the person of the Holy Spirit?

e. Do items come through some persons or things that are moved by the Holy Spirit Himself?

f. Are there blessings, gifts or information that reside in nature that could help or aid the Christian today which are not written in the Bible but are not contrary to the Bible?

g. Do items sometimes come from/through a combination of two or more of the above?

Purposes of this Study

First, it seeks to improve our biblical knowledge and teach us to avoid committing glaring inconsistencies in interpretation among Churches of Christ preachers.

Second, it seeks to promote our prayer life with the enhanced awareness of the Holy Spirit’s presence in our daily Christian life.

Third, it seeks to promote more spirituality with our awareness of the Holy Spirit’s workings in our daily Christian life.

Fourth, it promotes stronger dependence upon God with the awareness that God in person is personally assisting the Christian today.

Fifth, it promotes Christian humility in that wisdom, strength, victory in life, success and service are not solely produced from the mental and physical prowess of the individual Christian, but that much of these come as grace from a personal God.

Proposition for series #5: The Holy Spirit in person may help, influence, guide, nudge, prompt, or encourage the Christian today through other means above and/or beyond the written/oral word, the Bible, but not contrary to it during periods of trial, seduction and confusion.

Satan’s Workings

If we understand the workings of Satan as a persona, we might be able to more easily understand the workings of the Holy Spirit as a persona. By asking questions in the area and time of seduction/temptation of the Christian, we might improve our understanding of the working and influencing of the Holy Spirit persona on the Christian today.

Did Satan in person seduce and tempt Eve? Answer: Yes. Did Satan in person appear in heaven as read in Job 1 & 2? Yes. Did Satan in person afflict Job with sickness? Yes. Did the Devil in person cause the death of the children of Job? Yes. Did Satan use other spirit personae to afflict people in the time of the Old Testament? Yes. Did the Devil in person afflict people in during the personal ministry of Jesus on earth? Yes. Did Satan in person seduce Jesus Christ in the three temptations after the latter’s baptism (Mtt 4)? Yes. Did Satan in person seduce Judas Iscariot and entered Judas’ personality that resulted to his becoming a traitor (Lu 22:3; Jn 13:27)? Yes. Did unwritten satanic verses inspire Judas to turn traitor? Not a reasonable conclusion. Did Satan in person desire to claim Apostle Peter (Lu 22:31)? Yes. Do I believe that it was some oral/unwritten satanic verses that desired Peter? No!

Based on 1 Cor. 5:5, when an unrepentant disciple is disciplined and is delivered to Satan, is the unrepentant disciple delivered to the persona of Satan? Yes. Or is the unrepentant disciple delivered to the power of the written/oral Bible? No!

When Satan seeks to seduce Christians today, based on the analysis of 2 Cor. 11:14, could the Devil in person transform himself as an angel of light and approach a Christian? Yes. Could an evil person wear a mascara so he could in person seduce the Christian? Yes.

There’s also the temptation described in 1 Cor. 7:5 wherein by mutual consent an extended sexual abstinence between the husband and wife is observed to enhance the couple’s prayer and fasting. Would seduction by Satan in person a possibility by taking advantage of the extended sexual abstinence? Yes. Or could Satan employ some people to seduce personally one or both of the temporarily separated couple? Yes. Is the seducing activity of the Devil limited to the power of literary works authored by Satan and his followers? No!

Based on the story of Ananias and Saphira in Acts 5:1-11, did Satan in person fill up Ananias’ heart with a lying attitude? Most likely, yes. Acts 5:3-4 says that Ananias lied to the Holy Spirit. Was it the persona of the Holy Spirit that Ananias lied to? Yes. Could we say that Ananias lied to the unwritten words of the Holy Spirit? No! Furthermore, this account says that Ananias and Saphira lied to God. Was it the persona of God that the couple lied to? Yes. Or did Ananias and Saphira lie to the unwritten New Testament? No!

According to 1 Peter 5:8-9, when Satan walks around, does the metaphor apply to the persona of Satan? Yes. When Satan roars like a lion, does the metaphor apply to the persona of Satan? Yes. When Satan devours the seduced person, does the metaphor apply to the persona of Satan? Yes. Do you think the walking around and roaring and devouring apply to satanic verses? No!

X-rated films, CDs, and bold stage shows also promote successful seduction. Association with corrupt politicians could seduce the Christian to aspire to obtain political power; handling big amounts of money could seduce the Christian to love mammon above all else. All these are consummated apart from any oral or written satanic literary works.

Because of our consistent “yes” answers in many of the above questions, it is safe to conclude that Satan most often does his influencing and nudging and seducing in person. We recognize, though, that written or oral satanic verses and atheistic philosophical treatises could lead millions into the kingdom of the Devil.

Rev. 12:9 says that Satan deceives the whole world, is this the Devil in person doing the act? Yes. Or does the Devil accomplish his work via satanic verses and atheistic treatises only? It may include literary works but not limited to literary works.

If Satan is allowed to work and deceive the world both in person and through oral/written satanic literature, I would consider it unreasonable and absurd to conclude that the Holy Spirit who is Deity (omnipresent,-omnipotent-omniscient-transcendent-immanent) would be limited by Christians today in His activities through the biblical ideas ONLY, the oral/written word, as processed by the human brain. It is more logical to believe that the Holy Spirit operates in person as well as through the word. It is not and “either one OR the other” but rather it is “either one or both of them.”

Sin Against the Holy Spirit

Our Lord Jesus mentioned the sin/blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. See Matt. 12:1-31. Most Bible scholars believe that the context tells about disregarding the many miraculous deeds that Jesus accomplished to back up His claim of his Sonship and prophethood. In spite of the many miracles done by the Holy Spirit (v.28) through Jesus, the Jews still insisted that Jesus was not what He claimed to be. The oppositionists said that Jesus’ power in driving out evil spirits was from Beelzebub (v. 24, another name for the Devil). Jesus said that the Pharisees have committed the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit by assigning the Holy Spirit’s power to Beelzebub’s. Was this blasphemy committed against the persona of the Holy Spirit? Yes. Was the blasphemy committed against the inspired words of the Holy Spirit, the unwritten gospel? No!

Holy Spirit Workings from Creation to the First Century

Did the Holy Spirit in person accomplish His creative work in Genesis 1:2? Yes. Did the Holy Spirit in person help Gideon (Judges 6:34), Samson (Judges 13:25), Samuel the prophet (1Sam 10:6), King Saul (1Sam 11:6), King David (1Sam 16:13)? Yes.

Did the Holy Spirit in person descend upon Jesus and remained in Him (Jn 1:32,33)? Yes. Did the Holy Spirit in person assist John the Baptist? Yes. Did the Holy Spirit in person descend upon the apostles in Acts 2? Yes. Did the Holy Spirit in person descend upon the household of Cornelius (Acts 10)? Yes. Did the Holy Spirit in person come upon those whom the apostles laid their hands on in Acts 8? Yes. Did the Holy Spirit in person help Apostle Paul in his ministry? Yes. Did the Holy Spirit in person help Timothy and Titus? Yes. Did the Holy Spirit in person help the Roman, Corinthian, Thessalonian, Ephesian, Colossian and Hebrew Christians in the first century? Yes.

Are Verses Applicable in 21^st Century?

If from creation up to the time of the apostles of the Lord Jesus, the personal workings of the Holy Spirit was exercised upon nature and upon the servants of God, the remaining problem for this study to solve is applicability upon 21^st century Christians of the NT declarations and promises involving the workings of the Holy Spirit in the “Ordinary Measure” of the Holy Spirit.

Remember that the question is considered under the “Ordinary Measure” of the Holy Spirit as understood and accepted by Churches of Christ for decades.

Is the promised succor/aid/help of the Holy Spirit (God, Christ) that are found in Matt. 7:13; 1 Cor. 10:13; Hebrews 2:18 and Hebrews 4:15-16 applicable to the Christian in the year 2008? Let’s analyze the passages.

*“And do not lead us into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one.” (Matt. 7:13)

(1) In times of trials and we pray, do we deal with a personal God? Yes. (2) When we ask for deliverance from severe temptation, do we expect a personal God to act and help us? Yes, we expect a personal God acting. (3) Is the Evil One a persona? Yes.

*“No temptation has overtaken you except such as is common to man; but God is faithful who will not allow you to be tempted beyond what you are able, but with the temptation will also make the way of escape, that you maybe able to bear it.” (1 Cor. 10:13)

(1) Based on the above, when the Christian is under severe trial and suffering, does this verse point to a personal God who cares and who could extend help when called upon? Yes. (2) Does this verse point to a God who is faithful and who personally cares? Yes. (3) Does this verse point to a God who personally cares to show the way of escape? Yes. (4) Does this verse say how God would personally show a way of escape? No! (5) Does this verse teach that it is from the written/oral word only, the Bible, that the Christian could determine the way of escape? No! (6) Does the Bible provide an example of escape for every conceivable confusing situation that millions of Christians find themselves in? No! If not, then the Bible does not provide the Christian an example of escape for every situation. (7) Is it reasonable then to think of a God to do some imperceptible nudgings and promptings governed by the spiritual orientation of the disciple and the heart’s attitude of dependence upon God so that the way of escape maybe arrived at? Yes, it’s reasonable. (7) Do I think of this God in our passage as both transcendent and at the same time immanent today? Yes. (8) Do I believe that this passage is applicable to the Christian today? Yes.

*“For in that He Himself has suffered, being tempted, He is able to aid those who are tempted.” Heb. 2:18.

(1) Based on the above, should I point to the person of Jesus Christ who experienced trials and temptations? Yes. (2) Does the verse point to a persona who could personally help? Yes. (3) Does the verse tell the Christian to read or hear only the accounts of Christ’s suffering and seduction to derive a sense of aid reception? No! (4) Is the aid in this verse derived from Bible knowledge only as mentally processed by the brain of the Christian? No! (5) Should I think of Jesus Christ in the heavens as both transcendent and at the same time immanent? Yes. (6) Is this passage an applicable assurance to the Christian in the 21^st century? Yes.

“For we do not have a High Priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but was in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin. Let us therefore come boldly to the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy and find grace to help in time of need.”

(1) Based on the above, should I think of Jesus Christ as High Priest in the heavens as a real persona as the high priest in the Old Testament tabernacle and temple was a real persona? Yes. (2) Does this verse point to a real, live persona who has feeling and sympathy? Yes. (3) Does the verse point to a persona who was himself tempted as the Christian today is tempted? Yes. (4) Does the verse encourage the Christian to approach the spiritual throne of grace by faith? Yes. (5) Is the real existence of that throne of grace situated in the heavens or situated in an idea that is read in the Bible? It is in the heavens; it is not a mere idea in the Bible. (6) Does the verse make me feel that the mercy and grace that ooze out from the spiritual throne that give spiritual strength to the Christian flow out from the person of the High Priest? Yes. (7) Does the verse make me feel that the mercy and grace flow out from an idea or mental Bible knowledge as processed by the mind of the Christian? That‘s not a reasonable deduction. (8) Does the verse make me feel that this spiritual strength from the throne of grace is the same in degree to the moral/ethical strength that a communist derives from the writings of Karl Marx – that is inspiration is derived from mentally processed wisdom only without any direct intervention emanating from the dead person? No, it is not parallel. God acts through the word. However He also acts beyond and above the written/oral word but not contrary to it. Whereas, Karl Marx can influence the socialist only through his idea that is read/heard and processed in the brain of the adherent.

Conclusion

Karl Marx is a physically dead persona. His spirit persona is in Hades. Marx’s spirit could not transmit wisdom and strength to a physically suffering and confused communist. A living communist derives wisdom and physical strength only from the mentally processed ideas which are derived from Marx’s writings. When a communist is trapped by a platoon of Army soldiers in the Sierra Madre mountains, would a way of escape be transmitted from the spirit of Karl Marx who is residing in Hades. No! Can the spirit of Karl Marx supernaturally and directly activate forces of nature to help the trapped communist? No

NASA headquarters could radio expert instructions, encouragement, news to its crew on the moon. NASA headquarters could activate computers which in turn activate spacecraft parts to fix themselves while out there in space. The Holy Spirit/God is no less powerful.

On the other hand, Christ/the Holy Spirit are living personae Who could personally and directly transmit abilities, comfort, encouragement, hope, wisdom, to the suffering, seduced Christian. Such enumerated help are derived above and beyond the mentally processed literary ideas from the Bible. These aids may come directly from the persona of the Holy Spirit/Christ. God could even activate nature in degrees imperceptible to the ordinary human senses so that nature would come to the aid of the beleaguered Christian. Or move people to give succor. This idea is backed up by our belief in the guardian angel (Matt. 18:10), of angels as ministering spirits sent out by God to aid the Christians (Heb 1:14), and angels disguised as visiting strangers (Heb 13:2). Or friends and acquaintances who suddenly become so gracious even in the absence of normal or natural human promptings thus supplying the Christian some much needed moral, material or cash assistance in time of dire crisis. ©

Christianity and Islam Compared (Series #3)

In Bible Study Lessons, Views on January 14, 2008 at 9:18 am

By Eusebio Tanicala, Ph.D.

This study seeks to provide our readers an objective comparison of some major teachings of the two great religions. We need to be well informed of each other’s major doctrines for better understanding.

This series #3 deals with what each one believes about Jesus the Messiah on His being the Son of God.

Christianity and Islam equally declare that Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Mary, is the Messiah. Judaism, however, denies that Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah. Christianity and Islam both recognize that Jesus the Messiah is a prophet, God’s messenger.

Deedat Vs. Yusuf Ali

On the one hand, Christianity believes that Jesus Christ is “the Son of God;” on the other hand Islam believes that Jesus Christ is “a son of God.” But Muslim apologists are not agreed on this point. Ahmed Deedat in his booklet “Christ in Islam” quotes A.Yusuf Ali’s translation of the Quran in English in its index and declares that Jesus Christ is “not son of God” by citing 9:30 (page 7). I get the quotation from the Qur’an’s translation of Dr. Muhammad Taqi-ud-Din Al-Hilali & Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan, “And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah, and the Christians say: Messiah is the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouths. They imitate the saying of the disbelievers of old. Allah’s curse be on them, how they are deluded away from the truth.” This means that A. Yusuf Ali considers Jesus the Messiah “not son of Allah.” Islam denies the sonship of Jesus even with the small letter s.

Another Qur’anic passage says this, “… And say: ‘All the praises and thanks be to Allah, Who has not begotten a son (nor an offspring), and Who has no partner in (His Dominion, nor He is low to have a Wali (helper, protector or supporter)…” (17:111). (See also Surah 18:4,5). In addition, Surah 43:59 says, “He (Jesus) was not more than a slave. We granted Our Favour to him, and We made him an example to the Children of Israel (i.e. his creation without a father).”

This means that Jesus the Messiah, to a Muslim, is not a begotten son.

Dr. Al-Hilali and Dr. Khan in the index of their translation of the Qur’an say, “Jesus never called himself Son of God as far as I know – but he used to call himself the ‘Son of Man’ (ref. Mark 2:10) although he heard himself being called by that name he did not object – as assumed in the Bible – and did not consider the title exclusively for him. According to the Biblical term in the Old and New Testament, every God-fearing righteous person is called ‘Son of God”. In Matthew 5:9, we read: “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God.” (p. 1027) Indeed, Dr. Al-Hilali and Dr. Khan did not know their Bible! In the Christian Bible, because of the uniqueness of Christ’s sonship, the term Son when applied to him is capitalized. Just as the Qur’an is a unique book so the Muslims capitalize the first letter. It is not true as Al-Hilali and Khan say that “every God-fearing righteous person is called Son of God.” A righteous person is a child of God but nowhere does the Bible say that that an ordinary person is the Son of God with capital S. Al-Hilali and Khan’s argument is misleading.

But on page 28, Ahmed Deedat makes this confession, “They know that according to their own God-given (?!) records, God has sons by the tons: ‘Adam. Which was the SON OF GOD,’ Luke 3:38; ‘That the SONS OF GOD saw the daughters of men that they were fair…’ Gen. 6:2, 4; ‘Israel is MY SON, even my firstborn’ Exodus 4:22; ‘for I (God) am a FATHER to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn’ Jeremiah 31:9; ‘the Lord hath said unto me (David) Thou art MY SON: this day have I BEGOTTEN THEE’ Psalm 2:7; ‘FOR AS MANY AS ARE LED BY THE Spirit of God, they are SONS OF GOD.” Romans 8:14.” Deedat cleverly misrepresents the Christian Bible (NKJV) in that he capitalizes in writing SONS OF GOD. But the Bible does not capitalize but write this way: “the son of Adam, the son of God” (Luke 3:38; “that the sons of God saw the daughters of men” (Genesis 6:2); “Israel is my son, My firstborn” (Exodus 4:22); “’You are My son,” Psalm 2:7; “these are sons of God” Romans 8:14. Dr. Abu Ameenah Bilal Philips is more truthful in his presentation in his booklet “The True Message of Jesus Christ,“ pages 42-46 because he writes in small letters the term “sons” as are found in the Bible.

Ahmed Deedat continues on page 28, “Can’t you see that in the language of the Jew, every righteous person, every Tom, Dick and Harry who followed the Will and Plan of God, was a SON OF GOD. It was a metaphorical descriptive term, commonly used among Jews.” Again, he writes with capital letters which is misleading. What does this mean? It means that Deedat accepts that Jesus Christ and other obedient people as metaphorically “sons of God” Not that God physically sired the obedient, physical people. And the sonship of Jesus Christ is metaphorical not physical. Jesus’ being begotten son is also metaphorical that expresses His uniqueness.

The above quotations clearly is a case of A. Yusuf Ali VERSUS Ahmed Deedat. One says Jesus is “not son of God” but the other says he is SON OF GOD.

Islam recognizes the Gospel

Another convergence of belief for Christianity and Islam is acceptance of the Gospel as God’s message to mankind. On one hand Christianity attaches two meanings to the term “Gospel.” First, it refers to the biography of Jesus Christ recorded in the four books of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John; and second, the term “gospel” refers to the work of Jesus Christ in the redemption of mankind: His incarnation, his sufferings, his death, his burial, his resurrection and his ascension into the heavens.

On the other hand, Islam declares that the Gospel should be accepted as God’s message but how the term “Gospel” is defined is not clear to this writer. Sometimes the Qur’an promotes acceptance and belief on the Gospel, but when a declaration in the Gospel is contrary to a Muslim’s faith and practice, the Gospel is conveniently set aside. This practice is misleading and dishonest.

The following is a declaration from the Qur’an, “… So believe in Allah and His Messenger (Muhammad), the Prophet who can neither read nor write (i.e.Muhammad) who believes in Allah and His Words [(this Qur’an), the Torah and the Gospel and also Allah’s Word: ‘Be!’ – and he was i.e. Jesus—son of Mary], and follow him so that you maybe guided.” (VII.158 Translation by Al-Hilali & Khan) You see, belief in the Gospel is commanded in the Qur’an. In the last part of the above passage, “follow him so that you maybe guided” by grammatical construction refers to Allah’s Word, Jesus Christ.

The reader sees the term Gospel on the third line. This Gospel record should be believed. In the following paragraphs, we are going to submit passages from the Gospel that the Qur’an says should be accepted and believed.

Gospel Record

Christians who know their Bible don’t teach that Jesus the Christ was begotten in the sense of physical siring or generating a child through the natural, human activity of male and female intercourse. Deedat points out a “metaphorical” use of the term “begotten” because he knows that Adam, Israel, King David, all obedient Christians are called “sons of God” but were not physically sired by Allah. It is metaphorical and not physical sonship. Just as the term “firstborn” does not take the ordinary meaning of being born physically and not to mean first in chronological time. So if “firstborn” means uniqueness or rank, so does “begotten” mean uniqueness and elevated rank. Deedat and the Qur’an pitifully misrepresent Christian belief on this matter on the Sonship of Jesus the Christ.

Now we submit passages from the Gospel which the Qur’an says should be believed by Muslims:

“The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him, and said,, ‘Behold! The Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!… And John bore witness, saying, ‘I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and He remained upon Him. ‘I did not know Him, but He who sent me to baptize with water said to me, ‘Upon whom you see the Spirit descending, and remaining on Him, this is He who baptizes with the Holy Spirit. And I have seen and testified that this is the Son of God.’” (Gospel of John 1:29 – 34, NKJV)

This testimony is from John the Baptist, one of the prophets recognized by Islam. If Muslims would not accept this testimony of John the Baptist, then they are disregarding a true prophet of God.

“Nathanael said to Him, ‘How do You know me?’ Jesus answered and said to him, ‘Before Philip called you, when you were under the fig tree, I saw you.’ Nathanael answered and said to Him, Rabbi, You are the Son of God! You are the King of Israel! Jesus answered and said to him, ‘Because I said to you, ‘I saw you under the fig tree,’ do you believe? You will see greater things than these.” (Gospel of John 1:48-50).

Nathanael, one of the apostles, made this confession and Jesus Christ confirmed the truism of that confession. Again this passage is from the Gospel which the Qur’an says should be believed. Jesus the Christ who is recognized by the Qur’an as a true prophet of God recognized the confession of Nathanael that his is the Son of God.

“No one has seen God at any time. The only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him.” (Gospel of John 1:18).

This is John the Apostle giving the testimony written in a Gospel record which the Qur’an says should be accepted and believed.

Jesus the Christ made this confession, “I speak what I have seen with My Father… Jesus said to them ‘If God were your Father, you would love Me, for I proceeded forth and came from God; nor have I come of Myself but He sent Me.” (Gospel of John 8:38, 42). This strongly suggests the procession of Christ’s non-human persona from God and from heaven which antedates His incarnation. Notice also John 16:27, “…I came forth from God.” In John 17:4-5, “I have glorified You on the earth. I have finished the work which You have given Me to do. And now, O Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was.” His divine persona, the pre-incarnate persona of Jesus came from heaven, proceeded out from God and antedates his becoming a human being.

Notice the conversation in Luke 22:66-71. The elders of the Jews took Jesus into their session hall in Jerusalem and asked questions. “Then they said, ‘Are You then the Son of God?’ So He said to them, ‘You rightly say that I am.’” It was Jesus the Messiah Himself who declared that He is the Son of God. He said that the elders rightly pronounced his Sonship, the Son of God. This is a Gospel record which the Qur’an says should be accepted and believed.

The Sonship of Jesus the Messiah is the pillar of Christianity. John the Apostle makes this conclusion in his Gospel record: “And truly Jesus did many other signs in the presence of His disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name.” (Gospel of John 20:30-31). This is a Gospel record that the Qur’an says should be accepted and believed.

There are other passages in the Gospel record that state that Jesus of Nazareth is the Son of God. But the submitted verses above should be sufficient to prove the insufficiency of research done by Muslim apologists in their denial that Jesus the Messiah is the Son of God.

It is very clear that the Gospel records prove that Jesus the Christ is the Son of God. In Christian belief, the Gospel records are inspired by God so it should be true. Jesus clearly acknowledged that he is the Son of God. John the Baptist, a true prophet recognized by Islam, confessed that Jesus is the Son of God. The claim denying the Sonship of Jesus the Christ that is promoted by Muslim apologists who don’t know their Bible should be the one discarded.

Does the Holy Spirit in person help the Christian today? (Series #4)

In Bible Study Lessons, News, Views on January 9, 2008 at 1:07 am

This is the fourth series in our study. I would like to repeat that we should go into this study as brethren helping one another. We are brethren struggling to find a reasonable and balanced view about the Holy Spirit.

CHURCHES OF CHRIST

This present study should be delimited. We are not talking about the views of the Pentecostals who claim direct, baptism and miraculous operation of the Holy Spirit on everyone who prays for the coming of the Holy Spirit. We are not talking about Mormonism and the Jehovah’s Witnesses that claim that the Holy Spirit personally and directly guide their leaders in the formulation of doctrines and teachings and strategies. We are not talking about teachings that contradict what is written in the Bible and is correctly interpreted.

Historically Churches of Christ have for decades taught that there are measures or degrees of the Holy Spirit’s work in helping, guiding, influencing, nudging, encouraging the Christian.

Holy Spirit Without Measure. This was given to Christ during his personal ministry on earth. We don’t talk about this degree of empowerment in this study. The person we refer to in this study is the Christian today, in the 21st century.
Baptismal and Laying on of Hands Measure. The apostles were baptized with the Holy Spirit as promised and they were empowered to do miraculous things to confirm the new message they delivered to the people. In turn, the baptized apostles laid their hands onto faithful men who cnfirmed the message of salvation that they preached to others. We don’t talk about this degree of empowerment in this present study. The person we refer to in this study is the Christian today, in the 21st century.
Ordinary Measure. All members of the Churches of Christ for decades agree on this degree. But the means or the how the Holy Spirit empowers or influences, or guides, or nudges, or encourages the Christian today is the ISSUE. One side says this empowerment resides ONLY IN WRITTEN/ORAL WORD, THE BIBLE. Another side syas that this empowerment resides in the written/oral word, the Bible, and ALSO DIRECTLY OR OTHER MEANS APART FROM THE WORD, but not contrary to the Bible.

In Series #3, we have submitted Job 26:13; Psalms 19:1-5 and Romans 1:19-21. From these verses we have concluded that the Holy Spirit does declare truth through the glorious material creation. The heavens when observed by astronomers reveal a wondrous design those description is not found in my NKJV. These verses tell you that belief in God or strengthening a belief in God could be derived from sources apart from my NKJV Bible, but not contrary to it.

Add Job 12:7-10 “Now ask the beasts, and they will teach you; and the birds of the air, and they will tell you; or speak to the earth, and it will teach you; and the fish of the sea will explain to you. Who among all these does not know that the hand of the LORD has done this, in whose hand is the life of every living thing, and the breath of all mankind?” Zoology, ornithology, ichthylogy, geology, biology all reveal wondrous dandy designs. Men of science quote Lord Kelvin, famous British scientist, who exclaimed: “If you study science deep enough and long enough it will force you to believe in God.”

The Bible says in Genesis 1:2b, “And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.” I have the picture that the Holy Spirit broaded over the globe and participated in the arrangement of the earth as a proper habitation of animals and mankind. A scientific study of nature helps the agnostics and some atheists to seriously think about the God we believe in.

Teachers of Christian Evidences also know that we have to use the Argument fom General Consent, Argument from Necessity, the Cosmological Argument, Teleological Argument, the Anthropological Argument and the Ontological Argument to reach out to the educated and scientifically oriented agnostics and atheists in order for them to pay attention. (See
discussion of these items here).

The views above considered, I would like to suggest that a deeper study of nature would help us build up our Christian faith in God apart from the Bible but not contrary to the Bible.

Why I believe in the existence of God

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Views on January 9, 2008 at 12:47 am

by Eusebio Tanicala, Ph.D.

Note: This lesson was shared with a congregation in Quezon City, Philippines several years ago. I want to share it with our readers.

REALM OF THE ABSTRACT
Arguing and persuading oneself on the existence and claims of God belongs to the realm of philosophy. One deals with the abstract. One deals with ideas, reason and logic.

Arguing and persuading oneself on the existence of spirits and ghosts is something similar to our topic. Maraming naniniwala na mayroong mga espiritu at multo. Marami ding hindi naniniwala.

Ideas, reasons, arguments, reflections derived from deep meditations to explain a belief in God are summed up in the following weird statement: “Reasons which reason can’t reasonably reason out.”

However, one who spends some time in spiritual matters, one who reflects on things beyond the physical, one who has some training in philosophy would have more appreciation of spiritual things than the ordinary mind.

Kagaya ng radio waves. Maraming radio waves sa isang kuwarto. Marami sa loob ng inyong kuwarto na hindi natin maririnig sa ating pangkaraniwang pandinig commentaries, songs and newscasts . But these sounds would become intelligible and understandable if one is trained in the field of electronics. When one is able to assemble radio or tv receivers, then the inaudible becomes audible and the silence becomes
verbal.

Kaya kailangan natin ang magandang spiritual receiver sa ating puso at isipan upang mabuo ang paniniwala sa Dios.

DEFINITION/DESCRIPTION OF GOD
Strictly speaking, we should not define the true God because the word “definition” means to set limits or boundaries. Our impressions about God is that He is infinite, limitless, boundless. He is only limited when it comes to what is contrary to His nature. God is holy, so He cannot be unholy. God is all powerful, but he could not become powerless. God is eternal, so He could not will to cease His existence.

The following are good representatives of people’s impressions about the true God:

Westminster Catechism: “A Spirit infinite, eternal and unchangeable in His being, wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness and truth.”
Ebrard: “The eternal source of all that is temporal.”
Fuller: “The first cause and last end of all things.”
Howe: “An eternal, uncaused, independent, necessary Being, that hath active power, life, wisdom, goodness, and whatsoever other supposible excellency, in the highest perfection, in and of itself.”
Calovius: “Essentially the Infinite Spirit.”

ARGUMENTS AND STATEMENTS OF FAITH
There are statements of belief in God that were formulated by philosophers and Christian apologists. These are not objection-free. But they express and support our intuition. The Bible declares the existence of God but does not seek to prove His existence. Even among
Christians, the Bible says this, “Whosoever comes to God must have faith that God exists.” Among Christians, belief in God is still largely maintained by faith. In our everyday life, we have to be careful less the Devil uses physical and sensual realities to drown our spiritual orientation.

Here are some of the major arguments and statements of beliefs in the existence of God. Take them together, string them one after the other to form a good view of the whole idea about God.

A. Argument from General Consent

Other apologists and authors call this as “Argument from Universality.” Still others call it “Argument from Intuition.” Based on observations of ancient literature, ancient arts, myths, contacts with tribes still having primitive ways of life, the majority of tribes and nations recognizes the existence of Beings/ being, a Great Spirit/spirits, a God/gods upon whom they depend on and worship.

The ancient Tagalogs had an idea of a Bathala; the ancient Ilocanos and Itnegs had their Kabunian; the Igorots had their Lumauig. The ancient Greeks and Romans had their gods like Zeus or Jupiter, Mercury, Mars, Athena, Diana, and others. The Apostle Paul observed this in Acts 17:16-29.

Filipino poet Cirilo Bautista wrote poetry on the Cave Paintings of Lascaux in France. The cave dwellers of France are believed to have done these cave paintings six thousand years ago.

The Vedas of India say: “There is but one Being–no second.” Charles Darwin, the evolutionist, says, “In my most extreme fluctuations, I have never been an atheist in the sense of denying the existence of a God.”

The conclusion is that there is a widespread consent in the existence of a Great Spirit Being. There must be one who has planted this idea in the minds of tribes and nations. Man in ancient times, man in the present age has an innate or inborn feeling to recognize a Supreme Being.

It has been reported in newspapers that the USSR and China under the atheistic leaders tried to eliminate belief in God. But that idea of a God still comes out even under repressive regimes.

B. Arguments from Necessity

August Strong, a scholar, made this reflection: “In contemplating finite existence, there is inevitably the suggested idea of an infinite Being as its correlative… We could not recognize the finite as finite except by comparing it with an already existing standard — the Infinite.” (Systematic Theology, 58).

This argument also means that man has a capacity and yearning for religion or a relationship with a Supreme Being. When people grow old or become sick, instinctively they realize that there is a Great Power. The explanation for this is that there is a God or Creator that planted this feeling in our being.

C. The Cosmological Argument

Sometimes this belief is called “Argument from a First Cause. To the ordinary observer this is expressed in the this statement: “For every effect there is a cause.” Some state it this way: “Begun existence must have a sufficient cause of that beginning.”

D. The Teleological Argument

Some call this the “Argument from Design.” Modern science tells us that all things in the physical world have their uses, that order pervades the universe, that the methods of nature or natural laws are rational methods. There is correlation of the chemical elements to each other, there is fitness of the inanimate world to be the basis and support of life; there is unity of plan in the organic world; there is existence and cooperation of natural laws.

Another theory states that the material universe has no beginning,that it has always been existing, and the world is blindly developing and blossoming. But the combination of the cosmological argument and the teleological argument would come out for the existence of an Intelligent Power or Intelligent Cause.

E. The Anthropological Argument.

Sometimes this is called the Moral Argument or others call it Man’s Mental and Moral Nature. Elements of this argument follows:

Man, as an intellectual and moral being, has had a beginning upon the planet;

Material and unconscious forces do not afford a sufficient cause for man’s reason, conscience and free will;

Man, as an effect, can be referred only to a cause possessing self-consciousness and a moral personality; and

There’s in man a desire for an ultimate realization of happiness so he aspires to attain this good thing.

These elements could not reasonably be derived from non-living objects.

F. The Ontological Argument

Sometimes this is called the Philosopher’s Argument because it is difficult to understand and difficult to accept among young minds. This argument has the following elements:

The idea of a God is necessary to our reasoning;
If there is nothing in reality corresponding to this idea of God, then our reasoning is deceptive;
And if the reality of the idea is null or non-existent, then there is no use reasoning and arguing further because then everything is nullity or non-existing.

CONCLUSION

Man is the image of God, therefore, man is an expression of God’s nature. Having this expression of God’s nature in us, we have that inborn longing for the parent of our spiritual persona.

This cause and effect relationship is found in Psalms 94:9,10: “God made our ears– can’t He hear? He made our eyes–won’t He see? He scolds the nations–won’t He punish them? He is the teacher of us all–hasn’t He any knowledge?”

Another passage is meaningful: “Dear friends, let us love one another, because love comes from God. Whoever loves is a child of God and knows God.” 1 John 4:7.

Does the Holy Spirit in Person Help the Christian Today? (Series #3)

In Bible Study Lessons, Views on January 3, 2008 at 4:06 pm

by Eusebio Tanicala, Ph.D.

(Editor’s Note: I appeal to brethren that we should make this study on the Holy Spirit’s work of urging, nudging, encouraging, influencing and guiding the Christian today as a team effort. Matagal nang sinaliksik ng mga kasamahan natin sa America, pero madilim pa rin ang ating pagkaintindi. Subukan natin ang kakayahan ng Pinoy. Let’s picture this as a launching into the deep, wide blue sea of theological thoughts. As a team, let’s open our hearts and minds, work together, compare notes, exchange ideas, show weaknesses and errors in reasoning, recognized strong arguments. We are like fishermen hunting for fish in the corals and possibly pearls in the giant clamps embedded in the sandy sea bottom. Let’s not quarrel. Let’s not choke each other. Let’s love and help one another).

There are those who believe that the Holy Spirit is completely immanent and is therefore perched in the heavens beyond the blue skies up above. These brethren believe that the Holy Spirit has revealed the Bible and is now in its printed form when read and its oral form when explained that the Holy Spirit may affect, influence, or guide the Christian today in the 21st century. It is claimed by these advocates that no other source of help is available outside the language of the Bible. Neither is help available from the person of the Holy Spirit.

In this Series #3, I would like to ask a few questions and I desire honest answers:

Suppose I want to earn 12 units of advanced astronomy so that I could appreciate and explain better the complex adornment of the heavens which was made by the Holy Spirit as testified to by the Job 26:13. I know that this advanced learning Astronomy in 12 units is a good work. Could anyone please tell me the Bible books and chapters and verses that would explain to me in mathematical details about the Supernovas, Black Holes, Pulsars, Dying Stars, Planetary Systems aside from the Solar System, the Kuiper Belt?

Please email me your answer.

Job 26:13 says that the Holy Spirit has adorned the heavens; Psalm 19:1-4 (the H.S. is included in the Godhead) says that the material cosmos declares the glory of God making voluminous unwritten/inaudible testimonies of God’s wondrous architectural and engineering abilities; Romans 1:19-21 declares that the material cosmos provides sufficient information in the formulation of a reasonable belief in God’s existence and a reasonable theological foundation so as to avoid idolatry. Could anyone deny the clear positive declarations of the the three above passages that the material cosmos which are the Holy Spirit’s work could provide knowledge about God apart from the written/oral word as contained in my New King James Version?

Please email me your answer.

Does the Holy Spirit in Person Help the Christian Today? (Series #2)

In Bible Study Lessons, Views on December 18, 2007 at 5:49 pm

by Eusebio Tanicala, Ph.D.

In the first series we made a comparison how Satan does his work and how the Holy Spirit works. If one believes that the Devil in person does his work of urging, nudging, encouraging, influencing, and guiding people that he tempts today, it would be unreasonable to deny the Holy Spirit the same personal action of urging, nudging, encouraging, influencing and guiding Christians. We have shown scriptures that the Holy Spirit could use the heavenly bodies to help create belief and partially know God without the Bible. We have shown that angels could be sent as personal messengers to help Christians. Thus it is clear that urging, nudging, encouraging, influencing and guiding to help Christians is not always and only through the oral/written Bible.

In this second lesson (series #2) we focus on the expression “personal indwelling” of the Holy Spirit. The term “indwelling” has been defined by two Filipino preachers who debated the issue this year as “guidance or influence of the Holy Spirit.” Care should be taken, however, not to create a dimensionalized abode or residence. We should not think of God (the Holy Spirit by extension) as present in heaven but not on earth. Or that when the Holy Spirit is felt on earth that He is not in heaven.

A very basic foundation in the understanding of this issue of “indwelling” is our acceptance of terms and principles recognized in dogmatic theology like omnipresence, omniscience, omnipotence, transcendence and immanence as attributes of the Godhead.

Claude B. Moss gives these definitions: “transcendence – God is above, beyond and outside all that He has made” and “immanence – God is inside all that He has made, as well as outside; He is the Creator, Preserver and Sustainer of all creation,” (The Christian Faith, pp. 15,16).

If the five terms above are recognized and accepted, then the debate should stop.

If God (the Holy Spirit by extension) is omnipresent and He is immanent, and we believe that there are three persons in the Godhead, then the immanent presence of the Holy Spirit is personal. Could we think of a corner of the universe where the omnipresent God (the Holy Spirit by extension) is not present in person?

Just to exercise our readers’ minds, may I force you to wrestle with the following questions so that you can go higher into the spiritual realm. Please read John 17:20-26 and answer the following:

How are all true believers one? (see vs. 21, 22)
How are the Father and the Son one? (vs. 21, 22)
How is the Father in (inside) Jesus Christ? (v. 21)
How is Jesus Christ in (inside) the Father? (v. 21)
How is Jesus Christ in (inside) all true believers? (vs. 23, 26)
How can person A be inside person B; but at the same time person B is inside person A?

Focalized Presence

Immanence, however, is not the same as focalized presence where help, urging, nudging, encouragement, influence, guidance is felt in some measure among chosen disciples. Think of the time that the Holy Spirit in a special way was with Jesus during His baptism at the Jordan River and in many miraculous works where Jesus demonstrated the explosions of the Holy Spirit’s power. On the other hand, think of the time of His arrest at Gethsemane and during the trial and crucifixion. Think of the Day of Pentecost in Acts 2 when the Holy Spirit’s exploding power was with Peter, but not during his arrest and imprisonment in Acts 4. The conclusion is that God (the Holy Spirit by extension) is omnipresent and omnipotent, but would only display sporadic presence and power that are felt by human senses.

During the Exodus, God was omnipresent but it was only at the locality of Mt. Sinai that God’s exploding grandeur and power was sensed by humanity. In like manner today, there are chosen people where the Holy Spirit chooses to nudge, urge, encourage, influence and guide according to the measure of the need, the intensity of the supplication for help that is lifted up to the heavens and the welcoming attitude of the individuals’ heart.

Indwelling

God (the Holy Spirit by extension) promised to dwell among the children of Israel (see 1 Kings 6:13), but God’s glorious personal presence did not explode in every corner of Canaan where the 12 tribes settled down. Neither was there a continuous day and night glorious personal presence exploding in the tabernacle and temple. There were only sporadic shekinahs in the holy of holies.

King Solomon said, “Behold, heaven and the heaven of heavens cannot contain you. How much less this temple which I have built!” (1Kings 8:27). The LORD says, “Heaven is My throne, and earth is My footstool, where is the house that you will build me? And where is the place of my rest?” (Isaiah 61:1)

Colossians 2:9 says, “For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily.” If you want to insist on an Iglesia Ni Cristo (INC) minister that the fullness of the Godhead dwelt in that human body of Jesus Christ, why can’t you accept that the Holy Spirit can dwell in your human body? If we say that only through the word, the Bible, that the Holy Spirit would indwell the Christian, then it would follow that only through the word, the Bible, did the Godhead dwell in Jesus bodily.

These few verses quoted above express the simultaneous transcendence and immanence of God in the universe. Yes, it is difficult to accept this thing if our minds dwell in the dimensionalized material world. But we are talking about a spiritual persona. This should be accepted as true even if it could not be satisfactorily demonstrated physically, just as the Trinity is true yet it remains difficult to explain how three persons is one God. It is difficult to explain mathematically how the Father is in the Son, and at the same time the Son is in the Father.

There are what we call antinomies, seeming contradictions, but these things are true. They have to be accepted by faith because these things are in the higher realm.

(To be continued)

Does the Holy Spirit Personally Help a Christian in the 21st Century? (Series #1)

In Bible Study Lessons, Views on December 17, 2007 at 5:04 am

by Eusebio Tanicala, Ph.D.

Members of the Churches of Christ believe that the Holy Spirit is a person, the third person in the Trinity. The question in this series is “Does the Holy Spirit directly or in person work,help, urge, nudge, influence, encourage, guide a Christian today?

It is an accepted issue that the Holy Spirit helps, urges, nudges, encourages, guides a Christian today through the Bible, through the word. But this writer denies that the Holy Spirit always and only work through the Bible in helping, urging, nudging, encouraging, guiding a Christian. “Thro the word only” means that a Christian has to always read/hear the Bible, then process the information in his mind (brain) and what is shifted and accepted becomes his conviction and persuasion. This position of “thro the word only” is too limited. .

The “thro the word only” is like the idea that Karl Marx or Jose Rizal could influence the 21st century man through their literary works only that are read or propagandized by ideologists. Their spiritual persons could not transmit any message or nudging to the minds and hearts of communists and Rizalists. Do you believe that the Holy Spirit is in the heavens, but He is as limited as the spirit of Karl Marx or the soul of Rizal?

This series of short articles shall endeavor to prove the reasonableness of the the position that aside from the Bible (the word), the Holy Spirit may choose to help, urge, nudge, encourage,influence, guide a Christian in a direct or personal way. We shall go step by step in this exploration.

STEP #1. MAKE A COMPARISON ON HOW THE HOLY SPIRIT AND HOW THE DEVIL DO THEIR RESPECTIVE WORKS.

In my booklet, “19 Steps Towards a Better Understanding of the Humanity and Deity of Christ” the comparative chart showing what the Devil did and what Christ did opens the eyes of many Bible students about the deity of Christ. When this comparative method is applied in the present series, eyes will also be opened.

We ask questions.

When the Devil roars and prowls and devours people (1Pet.5:8), may he do it personally, or does he accomplish the act only and always through satanic prose and poetry? ____ On the other hand, when the Holy Spirit works, helps, urges, nudges, encourages, influences, guides a Christian, may He do it directly/personally if He chooses to? ___
When the Devil tempts a Christian by working on the libidinal or instinctive sexual, lustful desires (1 John 2:16; Gal. 5:19; Romans 7:14-25), may the Devil do the influencing directly or personally, or does he do the work through written/oral satanic prose and poetry always and only?___ On the other hand, when the Holy Spirit helps a Christian in controlling the lustful libido and encourages its legal expression within marriage, may He do the infuencing directly or personally (Rom. 1:24-27;2:12-16), or does He work through the written/oral Bible only? ___
Satan in his work of influencing atheists to believe in evolution as an explanation of the universe, does he do the work through satanic prose and poetry only and always? ____ On the other hand, the Holy Spirit garnished the heavens and God created the cosmos (Job 26:13; Romans 1:20), may the Holy Spirit use the material universe to persuade men to believe in God even without the written/oral Bible? _____
Ephesians 6:12; Mark 5:1-20 speak of wrestling with principalities and powers and rulers of the kingdom of darkness, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in heavenly places, are these characters mentioned personalities that influence people or are these items listed mere philosophical ideas contained in prose and poetry only? ____ On the other hand, if Christians consider Eph. 6:12 & Mark 5:1-20 as pointing to spiritual personalities becoming victorious and the Holy Spirit is displaced in the Christian’s heart, the Holy Spirit is grieved (Eph. 4:30), is the Holy Spirit that is made sad a person or is the Bible the one grieved? ___
When a Christian resists the Devil (1 Peter 5:9), is he resisting a personal Devil or does he resist a message or an idea from the Bible? ____
When the guardian angel (Matt. 18:10) works, or angels are sent by God (Heb. 1:14; 13:1-2) to minister to the saved, or visit a Christian, are these personalities working in person as messengers of the Holy Spirit? ____

Seriously reflect on the above questions. Answer them.

(To be continued)

christian, church, islam, religion

CHRISTIANITY and ISLAM – COMPARISON and CONTRAST

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Views on October 29, 2007 at 7:41 am

INTRODUCTION

This lesson is presented with the hope that PBC Alumni and Church Leaders will gain much understanding about Islam and Muslims. And with enlightenment on our side, we shall be able to talk and deal with Muslim friends in an enlightened manner.

Several years ago, a PBC alumnus complained to me that he didn’t know what to talk about when his Muslim neighbor insisted that Islam is the correct religion and Christianity is not.

A second member of the church asked me what she should bring out if and when a Muslim friend would want to compare Islam with Christianity. These two brethren made me start buying books so I could have more information about Islam.

A third factor that pushed me to make a serious study of Islam is the reality that the New Testament region of Syria and Asia Minor where the Apostle Paul labored and is romanticized in the Book of Acts have been lost to the Orthodox Church/Roman Church as a small minority and is dominated by Islam. Syria is about 90% Islam while Turkey which was Asia Minor is about 95% Islam. Read the rest of this entry »

▶ View 8 Comments

God’s Part – [FORGIVENESS of SINS] – Man’s Part

In Bible Study Lessons on March 24, 2007 at 10:44 am

Bible Study Lesson: There’s God’s Part and There’s Man’s Part in the Forgiveness of Sins

Objective: After the lesson, every member should be able to

a) list down God’s part as well as man’s part in the forgiveness of sins before born again, and;

b) be able to tell at what specific point in time or in what specific step in the process of obeying God that a truth seeker obtains forgiveness of sins before being born again. Read the rest of this entry »

Pagangkin ni Felix Manalo ng kanyang pagka-anghel hindi tugma sa historia

In Bible Study Lessons, Features, Views on March 8, 2007 at 3:06 am

Note: The article is written in the Filipino language.

Walang halong malisya ang sanaysay na ito. Ilalahad lang natin ang mga pangyayari sa historia ng mundo. Ang bumabasa ay siyang humusga kung ano ang katotohanan. Buhay na walang hanggan ang mapapala ng makatunghay ng katotohanan, ngunit kaparusahang kamatayan ang resulta ng kamalian. Read the rest of this entry »