Mr. Soriano’s Interpretation Has Changed

By Eusebio Tanicala, Ph.D.

About mid afternoon of May 16th, as I was checking up the programs in all the channels fed into our TV set by the cable system we subscribe to, I tuned in for a few minutes at Mr. Soriano’s program in Channel 59. He answered a question about the Lord’s Supper celebration.

This is the second time I hear Mr. Soriano about the Lord’s Supper subject matter on TV. He has really changed from his earlier position.

Mr. Soriano and his adherents used to completely reject a literal observance of the Lord’s Supper that uses material elements of bread and wine. The two major premises he used to affirm his earlier position are the following:

1. By using John 6:63, he insisted that the real Lord’s Supper is teaching/learning the words of Christ which give life and not taking in material elements that spoil. His Tagalog term for material bread and wine was “napapanis.” If bread and wine spoil, therefore these are not life giving elements, he insisted in the past.

2. This group used to laugh at people who celebrated the Lord’s Supper at morning time because he claimed that the term “supper” defined the time of observance which should be in the evening.

3. In the past, he merely disregarded the institution of the Lord’s Supper as described in several places in the New Testament like Matthew 26, Mark 14, Luke 24 and 1 Corinthians 11. He merely insisted on John 6:63.

But his answer this afternoon of May 16 was very clear. He now takes the position that there is a Lord’s Supper that uses the material elements of bread and wine. But it is held once a year in connection with the Passover which falls on the 14th of Abib and the celebration at evening time falls on the 15th day, he said.

Which means that Mr. Soriano has repudiated his earlier stand which said that there is no Lord’s Supper using material bread and wine.

By following the earlier explanation of the “Ang Dating Daan” group that their Lord’s Supper was teaching/listening to the words of Christ, we have told our members to ask: “If supper necessarily meant evening time, do you in the Ang Dating Daan teach/listen to Bible lessons at evening time only? Why do you teach and broadcast even at morning time?” We never got an honest answer from the group of Mr. Soriano.

By following the line of reasoning based on Mr. Soriano’s crude literalism on the meaning of supper, we have asked if they cling to literalism when they go to the grocery. When Mr. Soriano buys hotdog, does he get literal hotdogs from the freezer? Is the hotdog from the freezer in the grocery literally “hot” and literally “dog”? No honest answer came our way. We also asked about the plant/flower dama de noche. Is the dama de noche still a dama de noche at morning time? Dama means lady and noche means evening. No answer came.

I urge the brethren to press these items with the members of the group “Ang Dating Daan.”

Ask them why Mr. Soriano has changed his stand. Ask them why they now accept the presence of symbolism in the ordinance when in the past they based their reasoning on literalism.

Beware ! Mr. Soriano is capable of teaching error!! Some people say that they have heard Mr. Soriano making the claim that he is the only tele-evangelist who teaches the whole truth of the Bible. #

%d bloggers like this: