INC in RH bill

Iglesia ni Cristo backs RH bill

THE influential Iglesia ni Cristo said it is willing to support bills on reproductive health “as long as there would be no immoral elements in them.”
In a letter to Representative Rogelio J. Espina, chairman of the population and family relations committee in the House of Representatives, Eduardo Manalo, INC executive minister, said the organization supports “modern methods of contraception” as long as they do not encourage abortion that, with the use of “abortifacients involve the taking of life, which God explicitly forbids.”
He said INC does “not support the natural family planning method and all its variants. These so called birth control methods depend upon abstinence on the part of the married couple. These methods are not only unnatural and ineffective but they are also immoral, since they contradict the commandment that God has given to married couples,” Manalo said. “Parents today have a moral obligation to plan the number of their children and keep it under control.”
“We believe that it is a moral imperative for parents to watch over all their children and provide them with food, shelter and clothing as well as proper education and religious and moral training,” he said.
The INC has been known for its strong political influence, especially during elections when the organization reportedly votes as a bloc. It is also known to maintain a close “friendship” with incumbent administrations while not losing “discreet connection” with the opposition.
“We are all well aware of the dire situation of our country caused by overpopulation,” said Manalo, adding that many of society’s worsening ills “can be traced to families growing so large.”
source: cathnewsphil.com

Here is what written in the letter:

12 October 2010

HON. ROGELIO J. ESPINA, M.D.
Chairman
Committee on Population and Family Relations
House of Representatives
Republic of the Philippines

Dear Congressman Espina,

We would like to thank the Committee on Population and Family Relations for requesting our position concerning the Bills of Reproductive Health. We are all well aware of the dire situation of our country caused by overpopulation. Many of society’s worsening ills—from homeless families starving in miserable conditions and children not in school but instead begging day and night in nearly every major street to the rapidly spreading problems with drug abuse and rising crime rates—can be traced to families growing so large that an increasing number of parents cannot provide the most basic human needs to their families.

We consider it commendable that our lawmakers care enough for our fellow Filipinos that they are doing what they can do to alleviate the hardships so many of our countrymen are facing. IN what they propose, they can bring about not only an economic good for our countrymen but also a moral one. We are ready to support the Bills on Reproductive Health as long as there would be no immoral elements in them.

What are the moral aspects of the proposed bills that we support? We believe that it is moral imperative for parents to watch over all their children and provide them with food, shelter, and clothing, as well as proper education and religious and moral training. Hence, parents todayhave (sic) a moral obligation to plan the number of their children and keep it under control. The Bible states that a parent who does not provide for the needs of his own household is worse than an unbeliever (I Tim. 5:8). Since modern methods of contraception—by preventing married couples from having any unplanned pregnancies—assist in supporting this Christian principle, we support their use as long as these methods are empirically not abortifacient. Abortion and the use of abortifacients involve the taking of life, which God explicitly forbids (Exod. 20:13).

We do not support the natural family planning method and all its variants. These so-called birth control methods depend upon abstinence on the part of the married couple when the woman is fertile but allows marital relations only when she is not. These methods are not only unnatural and ineffective but they also are immoral, since they contradict the commandment that God has given to married couples. The Bible instructs married couples not to deprive one another of intimate marital relations for long, extended periods of time; further, any abstinence at all for a married couple is supposed to be with the mutual consent of husband and wife and not for the purpose of preventing pregnancies (I Cor. 7:3-5).

We appreciate the Committee’s gesture of soliciting our stand on this timely yet controversial issue.

Very truly yours,

EDUARDO V. MANALO
Executive Minister
___________________________________________________

There is a bible verse that the Catholic Church believe, it is written in the book of GENESIS where people is still few, they say that God said: "go fourth and multiply", but when the earth is filled with people, that became a problem to most countries called OVERPOPULATION, do still we need to follow what was written in the bible made thousand years ago, about this thing?

When there is OVERPOPULATION, do we need to multiply and multiply to the point of some are dying because of hunger and so on?

Do you get the point?

the catholic church wanted to point out that God doesnt know what the words empty and full mean.


And so,

If there is one to BLAME WHY THE PHILIPPINES IS STILL ON POVERTY, we know whom to blame!

its not just about corruption, its about the INFLUENCE and the commanding of this powerful church to the government every now and then!

REMEMBER: Our resources is LIMITED!

this message is for those CATHOLIC DEFENDERS who have a low understanding about life, being blinded and influenced about their true opinion and what was happening in reality because of their faith!

I just admire those catholic authorities,and even priests that support the RH bill, YES! there are! and im not inventing a story because just this month, ive watch a documentary on channel 11, GMA NEWS TV, on reel time, about this.


Atleast, THEY ARE OPEN MINDED ON WHAT WAS REALLY HAPPENING ON REALITY!

AGAIN, ITS NOT JUST THE CORRUPTION IS THE PROBLEM HERE IN OUR COUNTRY THAT MAKES US STILL ON POVERTY!

Ash wednesday

What is the history of "Ash Wednesday" then?

-->

"Ashes in the History of the Church

Despite all these references in Scripture, the use of ashes in the Church left only a few records in the first millennium of Church history. Thomas Talley, an expert on the history of the liturgical year, says that the first clearly datable liturgy for Ash Wednesday that provides for sprinkling ashes is in the Romano-Germanic pontifical of 960.

Before that time, ashes had been used as a sign of admission to the Order of Penitents. As early as the sixth century, the Spanish Mozarabic rite calls for signing the forehead with ashes when admitting a gravely ill person to the Order of Penitents.

At the beginning of the 11th century, Abbot Aelfric notes that it was customary for all the faithful to take part in a ceremony on the Wednesday before Lent that included the imposition of ashes. Near the end of that century, Pope Urban II called for the general use of ashes on that day.

Only later did this day come to be called Ash Wednesday. At first, clerics and men had ashes sprinkled on their heads, while women had the sign of the cross made with ashes on their foreheads. Eventually, of course, the ritual used with women came to be used for men as well.

In the 12th century the rule developed that the ashes were to be created by burning palm branches from the previous Palm Sunday. Many parishes today invite parishioners to bring such palms to church before Lent begins and have a ritual burning of the palms after Mass." source: americancatholic.org

The introduction of the Article in americancatholic.org,

"Although Ash Wednesday is not a Catholic holy day of obligation, it is an important part of the season of Lent. The first clear evidence of Ash Wednesday is around 960, and in the 12th century people began using palm branches from the previous Palm Sunday for ashes."

Clearly then, Ash wednesday is just another invented "tradition" in the Catholic Church who's claiming to be the church in the 1st century but the DOCTRINES CANNOT FIND ITS ROOTS IN THE 1st CENTURY CHURCH! Therefore, this another "TRADITION" in the Catholic Church said to be...


In answers.yahoo.com we can find the answer,

"Ash Wednesday was taken from Roman paganism, which took it from Vedic India. Ashes were called the seed of the fire god Agni, with power to forgive sins. Ashes were said to were a symbol for the purifying blood of Shiva, in which, one could bathe away sins. During Rome's New Year Feast of Atonement in March, people wore sackcloth and bathed in ashes to atone for their sins.

As the dying god of March, Mars took his worshippers sins with him into death. The carnival fell on dies martis, the Day of Mars. In English, this was Tuesday, because Mars was identified with the Saxon god Tiw. In French the carnival day was Mardi Gras, "Fat Tuesday," the day of merrymaking before Ash Wednesday."

May i remind again what was written in the bible?

“In particular, I want to urge you in the name of the lord, not to on living the aimless kind of life that pagans live. Intellectually they are in the dark, and they are estranged from the life of God, without knowledge because they have shut their hearts to it.” Eph. 4:17-18, Jerusalem bible

Warning: Dont be blinded with the CREATED traditions and PRACTICES!

What is Valentines day?

Meaning of Valentines Day nowadays.

"a day for the exchange of tokens of affection" source: thefreedictionary.com

History of Valentines Day

The history of Valentine's Day is obscure, and further clouded by various fanciful legends. The holiday's roots are in the ancient Roman festival of Lupercalia, a fertility celebration commemorated annually on February 15. Pope Gelasius I recast this pagan festival as a Christian feast day circa 496, declaring February 14 to be St. Valentine's Day." source: infoplease.com

"Church policy in dealing with the ancient religions often included a strategy of incorporating, rather than just banning, the "old-time religions". And it proved to be an effective strategy. Many contemporary church rituals and holiday traditions have components based on ancient pagan celebrations. "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em" was the church's policy. And thereby the church essentially co-opted the old pagan Festival and turned it into to a religious holiday celebrating the Christian virtues of love and marriage."

"...Interestingly the Emperor Claudius and the Christian (Catholic) Church found themselves on the same side on this argument for the Church was also opposed to the pagan festivities, but on grounds related to its lustfulness and especially the practice of the "lottery"..." source: goddessgift.com

"More than a Hallmark holiday, Valentine's Day, like Halloween, is rooted in pagan partying. "

"The annual pagan celebration, called Lupercalia, was held every year on February 15 and remained wildly popular well into the fifth century A.D.—at least 150 years after Constantine made Christianity the official religion of the Roman Empire." source: news.nationalgeographic.com

"Feb. 14, the day on which valentines are exchanged, originally connected with the pagan festival of Lupercalia" source: thefreedictionary.com

Who is Saint Valentine?

Numerous early Christian martyrs were named Valentine. The Valentines honored on February 14 are Valentine of Rome (Valentinus presb. m. Romae) and Valentine of Terni (Valentinus ep. Interamnensis m. Romae). Valentine of Rome was a priest in Rome who was martyred about AD 269 and was buried on the Via Flaminia. His relics are at the Church of Saint Praxed in Rome, and at Whitefriar Street Carmelite Church in Dublin, Ireland.

Valentine of Terni became bishop of Interamna (modern Terni) about AD 197 and is said to have been martyred during the persecution under Emperor Aurelian. He is also buried on the Via Flaminia, but in a different location than Valentine of Rome. His relics are at the Basilica of Saint Valentine in Terni (Basilica di San Valentino).

The Catholic Encyclopedia also speaks of a third saint named Valentine who was mentioned in early martyrologies under date of February 14. He was martyred in Africa with a number of companions, but nothing more is known about him.

No romantic elements are present in the original early medieval biographies of either of these martyrs. By the time a Saint Valentine became linked to romance in the fourteenth century, distinctions between Valentine of Rome and Valentine of Terni were utterly lost.

In the 1969 revision of the Roman Catholic Calendar of Saints, the feastday of Saint Valentine on February 14 was removed from the General Roman Calendar and relegated to particular (local or even national) calendars for the following reason: "Though the memorial of Saint Valentine is ancient, it is left to particular calendars, since, apart from his name, nothing is known of Saint Valentine except that he was buried on the Via Flaminia on February 14."] The feast day is still celebrated in Balzan (Malta) where relics of the saint are claimed to be found, and also throughout the world by Traditionalist Catholics who follow the older, pre-Vatican II calendar.

The Early Medieval acta of either Saint Valentine were expounded briefly in Legenda Aurea. According to that version, St Valentine was persecuted as a Christian and interrogated by Roman Emperor Claudius II in person. Claudius was impressed by Valentine and had a discussion with him, attempting to get him to convert to Roman paganism in order to save his life. Valentine refused and tried to convert Claudius to Christianity instead. Because of this, he was executed. Before his execution, he is reported to have performed a miracle by healing the blind daughter of his jailer.

Legenda Aurea still providing no connections whatsoever with sentimental love, appropriate lore has been embroidered in modern times to portray Valentine as a priest who refused an unattested law attributed to Roman Emperor Claudius II, allegedly ordering that young men remain single. The Emperor supposedly did this to grow his army, believing that married men did not make for good soldiers. The priest Valentine, however, secretly performed marriage ceremonies for young men. When Claudius found out about this, he had Valentine arrested and thrown in jail.

In an embellishment to The Golden Legend provided by American Greetings, Inc. to History.com and widely repeated, on the evening before Valentine was to be executed, he wrote the first "valentine" himself, addressed to a young girl variously identified as his beloved, as the jailer's daughter whom he had befriended and healed, or both. It was a note that read "From your Valentine." source: wikipedia

God's TEACHING

“In particular, I want to urge you in the name of the lord, not to on living the aimless kind of life that pagans live. Intellectually they are in the dark, and they are estranged from the life of God, without knowledge because they have shut their hearts to it.” Eph. 4:17-18, Jerusalem bible

This kind of practice/tradition is just ONE of the MANY traditions in the CATHOLIC CHURCH that was adopted from PAGANS.

The house of worship

"...build the Temple. Then I will be pleased
with it and be honored," says the Lord" haggai 1:8

Nonmembers attacks the INC doctrine about building houses of worship. These people will quote Acts 17:24 and II Chro. 2:6, argue that the house of worship cannot be the dwelling place of God:

"The God who made the whole world and everything in it is the Lord of the land and the sky. He does not live in temples built by human hands."

"But no one can really build a house for our God. Not even the highest of heavens can hold him. How then can I build a temple for him except as a place to burn sacrifices to him?"

Clearly stated in the said verses that god does not dwell in temples made by man. And, the builder of the first temple, king solomon of Israel, says that heaven and the heaven of heavens cannot contain god.

QUESTION: As this case, in what sense is the house of worship the house of God?

ANSWER: Lets read II Chr. 7:16 that says,

"I have chosen this Temple and made it holy. So I will be worshiped there forever. Yes, I will always watch over it and love it."

There is no saying the fact that no house or temple can contain the creator, but there is a house that he has chosen and consecrated for himself. It is in this house, the house of prayer or house of worship, where his name, eyes and heart will dwell forever. It is here where his glory dwells, as said by King david:

"Lord, I love the Temple where you live, where your glory is." Ps. 26:8

Another attack is that for them, it would have been better for the church to course her resources to the improvement of the livelihood of her members, or just donate it for the charity rather than spend them on building houses of worship.

The reason some people think this way is that they believe that serving God can be performed anywhere a person chooses. They suppose that the construction of houses of worship is a thing of the past since they claim that christ and the apostles neither built nor commanded the building of these during their ministry.

Contrary to that belief, the Church of Christ upholds that the houses of worship are essential in serving god even in the Christian dispensation. The undying endeavor of the church in building majestic houses of worship, through the joint efforts of her leadership and her members, is solidly based of the BIBLE. That's why even our detractors do efforts just to show to others about their view that building houses of worship is not so important, INC continues the constructions of the houses of worship in the country and all around the world...

Africa

Philippines

America

Australia

And in 90 other countries...

BIBLE PROOFS

"Don't worship the Lord your God that way, but look for the place the Lord your God will choose—a place among your tribes where he is to be worshiped. Go there,...Be careful that you don't sacrifice your burnt offerings just anywhere you please. Offer them only in the place the Lord will choose. He will choose a place in one of your tribes, and there you must do everything I am commanding you." Deut. 12:45, 13:14

God's commandments that Moses taught were very precise. God should be worshiped in the way and in the place he chose. This proves that services to God should not be performed anywhere a person chooses. That's why God instructed his early nation to make a sanctuary or tabernacle for him (Exod. 25:8-9). The Tabernacle that God commanded his nation to make is the place where God promised to dwell. It is not his nature or being that dwells in the house of worship for, as testified by King Solomon, neither heaven nor the heaven of heavens can contain God
(I kings 8:27). What dwells in the house of worship is God's name (I kings 8:27-29) and glory (Ps. 26:8). Thus, the house of worship is properly called the house of God (I Chr. 28:6, Isa. 2:3, Luke 2:49).

Can faith alone save you?

Proponents of this so called “faith alone concept” almost invariably cite our Lord jesus Christ statement in John 3:16 to support their alleged share in the promised everlasting life. 

Obviously enough, this expedient man conceived formula of salvation emerged from these preachers’ superficial and erroneous interpretation of biblical pronouncements regarding faith and salvation. 

Superficial in the sense that it does away with numerous important and vital commandments of God through Jesus Christ necessary for man’s salvation; and erroneous in that it purports faith alone to be the sole basis of attaining eternal life.

Let us quote in full citation in the book of John:

“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” Jn. 3:16

Who is appointed to by the verse as the recipient of the promised everlasting life? Whosoever believes in Christ. Faith, indeed, is indispensable for man’s salvation. But is it enough to believe in Christ to be assured of salvation?

Not by Faith Alone

Can faith alone justify man to be worthy before the sight of god to inherit life eternal? In James 2:24, this is documented:

“You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.”

It is not faith alone, therefore, that makes man justified before God; to say otherwise is to question the righteousness of God’s justice! What does it mean that man is not justified even if he has faith but has no works? Apostle James states:

“What does it profit, my brethren, if a man says he has faith but has no works? Can his faith save him?” Jas. 2:14

The spirit of James’ discourse can easily be gleaned: faith alone, without works, cannot save man. How far from the truth and salvation are those who propagate and adhere to the so-called “Faith alone concept”? Faith by itself, if it has no works, is dead. (Jas. 2:17)

Does this mean then that faith is devoid of any religious significance in man’s service to God? No!

It is in fact one of the three cardinal virtues mentioned by Paul in his first letter to the Corinthians:

“So faith, hope, love abide, these three; but the greatest of these is love.”
I Cor. 13:13

Faith by works

But what faith has value for it will certainly and ultimately lead to one’s salvation? In james 2:22, this is stated:

“Seest thou how faith wrought with his works and by works was faith made perfect?”

This is then the kind of faith joined with works that everyone believing in Christ should possess to be worthy of God’s promise: perfect faith. What works should be done so that faith will be perfect? Apostle Paul writes:

“For we are his workmanship, created in Christ jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.” Eph. 2:10

Apostle Paul points to the good works which God had foreordained that we should do. What are these good works referred to by Paul? In his letter to the Philippians, the apostle states:

“Being filled with the fruits of righteousness, which are by Jesus Christ, unto the glory and praise of God.” Phil.1:11

This is the reason why faith alone is not sufficient for man’s justification before God: he needs to be filled with the fruits of righteousness, unto the glory and praise of God. What is the means prescribed for man to be filled with the fruits of righteousness? Apostle Paul’s statement is clear—“by Jesus Christ” .

What does it mean that “fruits of righteousness” are by jesus Christ? Does it simple mean to believe in Christ and profess him as Lord and savior? In John 15:4-5 this is written:

“Abide in me and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit by itself, unless it abides in the vine, itself, neither can you, unless you are in me. I am the vine, you are the branches. He who abides in me, and I in him, he it is that bears much fruit, for apart from me you can do nothing.”

But how could man be joined to Christ? Who are truly joined to Christ, as branches of the vine, according to the testimony of the bible? What is the equivalent of Christ being the vine and those joined to him being the branches? 

In Col. 1:18, this is written:

“He is the head of the body, the church...”

Which is the Church referred to by Apostle Paul as the “body” of Christ?

In eph. 5:23, 25, lets read:

“For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the Church: and he is the savior of the body” “Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it.”

It is the Church which Christ so dearly loved. Why was it necessary, after all, for Christ to die for the church? Because the church is his body and he himself is its savior. Lets read Acts 20:28 (Lamsa translation) that says:

“Take heed therefore to yourselves and to all the flock over which the holy spirit has appointed you overseers, to feed the church of Christ which he has purchased with his blood.”

The redeeming power of the blood of our Savior is meant only for the Church of Christ (Iglesia ni Cristo). We have to believe in Christ and accept him as a Lord And Savior, but faith alone cannot justify us unto salvation, but it is faith by works of righteousness!

The Seventh Day Sabbath

What is the seventh day Sabbath?

The seventh day of the week, Saturday, observed as the day of rest and worship by the Jews and some Christian sects.

Is it still valid to continue the observance of the seventh day Sabbath?

We, in the INC do not deny that the law on the observance of the seventh day Sabbath was given by God, yet not all people were embraced by this law for the simple fact that only the Israelites were commanded to keep the Sabbath:

“you shall remember that you were a slave in the land of Egypt, and the LORD your God brought you out of there by a mighty hand and by an outstretched arm; therefore the LORD your God commanded you to observe the sabbath day.” Deut. 5:15

The people of Israel who were enslaved in and were brought out of Egypt by the mighty hand of God were the ones commanded to keep the Sabbath.

Why were they commanded to observe the Sabbath?

For them to remember that they were once servants in the land of Egypt and that by God’s almighty hand, he took them out of the land of bondage. In spite of the fact that to them were given the law on the observance of Sabbath, yet it is quite revealing that they were not called Seventh day Adventist but Israelites, or simply Israel.

The modern day sabbatharians, although they were not enslaved in Egypt and were not the ones commanded to keep the Sabbath, insist on observing the seventh day Sabbath and had taken for themselves the same Seventh day Adventist. What a misnomer as far as the name of God’s people (to whom the law on Sabbath observance was entrusted) is concerned!

In fairness to seventh day Adventists who insist on the alleged continuing validity on the observance of the seventh day Sabbath, we will make a searching analysis of several verses alluded to by them.

 
Christ entered the synagogue on the Sabbath Day

“And He came to Nazareth, where He had been brought up; and as was His custom, He entered the synagogue on the Sabbath, and stood up to read.” Luke 4:16

This is one among the many verses used by seventh day Adventists to prove that our lord jesus Christ allegedly kept the Sabbath. But it should be noted that this particular verse does not say that jesus our lord observed the Sabbath day.

What then was the purpose of Christ jesus in entering the synagogue?
 
“Jesus traveled to Nazareth, where he had grown up. On the Sabbath day he went to the synagogue, as he always did, and stood up to read. The book of Isaiah the prophet was given to him. He opened the book and found the place where this is written: "The Lord has put his Spirit in me, because he appointed me to tell the Good News to the poor. He has sent me to tell the captives they are free and to tell the blind that they can see again. — Isaiah 61:1

God sent me to free those who have been treated unfairly — Isaiah 58:6 and to announce the time when the Lord will show his kindness." — Isaiah 61:2

Jesus closed the book, gave it back to the assistant, and sat down. Everyone in the synagogue was watching Jesus closely. He began to say to them, "While you heard these words just now, they were coming true!" Luke 4:16-21

Christ’s purpose in entering the synagogue was to read the book of the prophet Isaiah in order to prove his commission as God’s messenger, anointed to preach the good news or the gospel. It was not his purpose to observe the seventh day Sabbath as the modern sabbatharians alleged.

Granting without conceding, but merely for the sake of argument that our lord jesus christ’s purpose in entering the synagogue was to observe the Sabbath as the Adventists allege,

How would these present day sabbatharian comment on Luke 4:28-30?

“When all the people in the synagogue heard these things, they became very angry. They got up, forced Jesus out of town, and took him to the edge of the cliff on which the town was built. They planned to throw him off the edge, but Jesus walked through the crowd and went on his way.”

If, as seventh day Adventist insist, Christ went inside the synagogue to observe the Sabbath day, Why did the jews rise up and put him out of the city with the intention of killing him? This is food for thought for those who insist that Christ allegedly sanctions the observance of the seventh day Sabbath by entering the synagogue on the Sabbath.

“The son of Man is the Lord of the Sabbath”

Sabbatharians have an erroneous understanding of what our Lord jesus Christ emphasized—the son of man (Jesus Christ—Mt. 16:13-16) is lord of the Sabbath.” (Luke 6:5) They aver that because our lord jesus is the lord of the Sabbath, all people are obligated to observe the Sabbath.

Why did Jesus say he is the lord of the Sabbath?

“At that time Jesus was walking through some fields of grain on a Sabbath day. His followers were hungry, so they began to pick the grain and eat it. When the Pharisees saw this, they said to Jesus, "Look! Your followers are doing what is unlawful to do on the Sabbath day."

Jesus answered, "Have you not read what David did when he and the people with him were hungry? He went into God's house, and he and those with him ate the holy bread, which was lawful only for priests to eat. And have you not read in the law of Moses that on every Sabbath day the priests in the Temple break this law about the Sabbath day? But the priests are not wrong for doing that.

I tell you that there is something here that is greater than the Temple. The Scripture says, 'I want kindness more than I want animal sacrifices.' You don't really know what those words mean. If you understood them, you would not judge those who have done nothing wrong. "So the Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath day." Mt. 12:1-8

The above cited verses narrate the event when Christ’s disciples plucked and ate some ears of grain which was not lawful to do on the Sabbath. After informing them what David had done during the time of Abiathar, the highest priest, Christ emphatically declared:

“Then Jesus said to the Pharisees, "The Sabbath day was made to help people; they were not made to be ruled by the Sabbath day. So then, the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath day."” Mk. 2:27-28

Christ justified the actuation of his disciples and yet in so doing he did not sin (I pet. 2:22), thus proving that people in the Christian era are not bounded to observe the Sabbath.

 
Not to abolish the law

There are so many verses of the holy scriptures being used by the present day observers of the seventh day Sabbath. Space limitations prevent us to make a detailed analysis of those verses in order to expose their error in concluding that the continuance of the observance of the seventh day Sabbath is unbroken and valid in this Christian dispensation.

They cite Matthew 5:17 thus:

“Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy,but to fulfill.”

The position of the seventh day Adventist church is that the Sabbath law’s effectively continues to the present because our lord jesus Christ , they alleged, did not come to abolish the Sabbath law but to fulfill it. A close scrutiny of what Christ jesus said revelas no mention of the Sabbath. His words were clear and explicit : “Think not that I come to abolish the law and the prophets;…but to fulfill them.”

What is the proof that this does not concern the Sabbath law?

In luke 24:44-45, this is written:

“And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me. Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures,”

In view of the above clarification made by our lord jesus Christ it is astonishing how seventh day Adventist preachers could have erroneously concluded that the Sabbath law was not meant to be abolished by jesus christ but to fulfilled.

Such an erroneous conclusion can emanate only from pseudo preachers. What our lord jesus Christ was to fulfill was that which was written in the law of Moses and the prophets and the psalms: “…Christ should suffer and on the third day rise from the dead.” Nothing, and absolutely nothing was mentioned concerning the observance of the seventh day Sabbath.

What happens now to the vaunted claim of the alleged continuing validity on the observance of the seventh day Sabbath? It remains a claim based on the erroneous understanding of the teachings of the Holy scriptures.

What becomes now of the seventh day Adventist church? Like the many so-called Christian churches which were compared to weeds, it may remain for it was Christ who declared:

“Let the weeds and the wheat grow together until the harvest time. At harvest time I will tell the workers, "First gather the weeds and tie them together to be burned. Then gather the wheat and bring it to my barn." Mt. 13:30

To our friends within the seventh day Adventist church, we invite you to read and make a searching analysis of your own book “The story of our church” and with an open mind on your part, we believe that you will come to understand the impact of the significance of the title and especially the contents leading to the inevitable conclusion that yours is not the church founded by our Lord Jesus Christ.

Then why remain sabbatharians?

The Trinity

Can we find the word Trinity in the Bible?

Is the teaching about the Trinity can be found in the bible?

From cover to cover of the bible, can we find that the Father, Son and the Holy spirit are one God?

From cover to cover of the bible, can we find that JESUS CHRIST said that he is GOD?

We can understand what Trinity really means and discover its origin if we will open our minds and hearts, are we ready to face the truth?



What is Trinity?

The trinity in the dictionary means:

“the union of the three divine persons (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) in one Godhead”.

What is the history of the Trinity doctrine?

Is it true that it is a teaching that can be found in the bible? Or the fact that it only showed in the 4th century, formed by the high ranking officials in the Catholic Church and that there are so many formulas involved on formulating it? 

I will not give my any opinion here, let us just read wikipedia:


History

Origin of the formula

The basis for the doctrine of the Trinity is found in New Testament passages that associate the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Two such passages are Matthew's Great Commission: "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" and St Paul's: "The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all."[2 Cor. 13:14]

In 325, the Council of Nicaea adopted a term for the relationship between the Son and the Father that from then on was seen as the hallmark of orthodoxy; it declared that the Son is "of the same substance" (ὁμοούσιος) as the Father. This was further developed into the formula "three persons, one substance".

The answer to the question "What is God?" indicates the one-ness of the divine nature, while the answer to the question "Who is God?" indicates the three-ness of "Father, Son and Holy Spirit".

Saint Athanasius, who was a participant in the Council, stated that the bishops were forced to use this terminology, which is not found in Scripture, because the Biblical phrases that they would have preferred to use were claimed by the Arians to be capable of being interpreted in what the bishops considered to be a heretical sense.

They therefore "commandered the non-scriptural term homoousios ('of one substance') in order to safeguard the essential relation of the Son to the Father that had been denied by Arius."

The Confession of the Council of Nicaea said little about the Holy Spirit. The doctrine of the divinity and personality of the Holy Spirit was developed by Athanasius (c 293 - 373) in the last decades of his life. He both defended and refined the Nicene formula. By the end of the 4th century, under the leadership of Basil of Caesarea, Gregory of Nyssa, and Gregory of Nazianzus (the Cappadocian Fathers), the doctrine had reached substantially its current form.

Formulation of the doctrine

The most significant developments in articulating the doctrine of the Trinity took place in the 4th century, with a group of men known as the Church Fathers. Although the earliest Church Fathers had affirmed the teachings of the Apostles, their focus was on their pastoral duties to the Church under the persecution of the Roman Empire.

Thus the early Fathers were largely unable to compose doctrinal treatises and theological expositions. With the relaxing of the persecution of the church during the rise of Constantine, the stage was set for ecumenical dialogue.

Trinitarians believe that the resultant councils and creeds did not discover or create doctrine, but rather, responding to serious heresies such as Arianism, articulated in the creeds the truths that the orthodox church had believed since the time of the apostles.

The Ante-Nicene Fathers, although very likely foreign to the specifics of Trinitarian theology because they were not defined until the 4th century, nevertheless affirmed Christ's deity and referenced "Father, Son and Holy Spirit". Trinitarians view these as elements of the codified doctrine.

The Trinitarian view has been affirmed as an article of faith by the Nicene (325/381) and Athanasian creeds (circa 500), which attempted to standardize belief in the face of disagreements on the subject. These creeds were formulated and ratified by the Church of the third and fourth centuries in reaction to heterodox theologies concerning the Trinity and/or Christ.

The Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed, revised in 381 by the second of these councils, is professed by the Eastern Orthodox Church and, with one addition (Filioque clause), the Roman Catholic Church, and has been retained in some form in the Anglican Communion and most Protestant denominations.

The Nicene Creed, which is a classic formulation of the doctrine of the Trinity, uses "homoousios" (Greek for "of the same essence") of the relation of the Son's relationship with the Father. This word differs from that used by non-Trinitarians of the time, "homoiousios" (Greek for "of similar essence"), by a single Greek letter, "one iota", a fact proverbially used to speak of deep divisions, especially in theology, expressed by seemingly small verbal differences.

One of the (probably three) Church councils that in 264–266 condemned Paul of Samosata for his Adoptionist theology also condemned the term "homoousios" in the sense he used it. Fourth-century Christians who objected to the Nicene trinity made copious use of this condemnation by a reputable council.

Moreover, the meanings of "ousia" and "hypostasis" overlapped at the time, so that the latter term for some meant essence and for others person. Athanasius of Alexandria (293–373) helped to clarify the terms.

Because Christianity converts cultures from within, the doctrinal formulas as they have developed bear the marks of the ages through which the church has passed. The rhetorical tools of Greek philosophy, especially of Neoplatonism, are evident in the language adopted to explain the church's rejection of Arianism and Adoptionism on one hand (teaching that Christ is inferior to the Father, or even that he was merely human), and Docetism and Sabellianism on the other hand (teaching that Christ was an illusion, or that he was identical to God the Father).

Augustine of Hippo has been noted at the forefront of these formulations; and he contributed much to the speculative development of the doctrine of the Trinity as it is known today, in the West; the Cappadocian Fathers (Basil the Great, Gregory of Nyssa, and Gregory Nazianzus) are more prominent in the East. The imprint of Augustinianism is found, for example, in the western Athanasian Creed, which, although it bears the name and reproduces the views of the fourth century opponent of Arianism, was probably written much later.

These controversies were for most purposes settled at the Ecumenical councils, whose creeds affirm the doctrine of the Trinity.

According to the Athanasian Creed, each of these three divine persons is said to be eternal, each almighty, none greater or less than another, each God, and yet together being but one God, So are we forbidden by the Catholic religion to say: There are three Gods or three Lords.—Athanasian Creed, line 20.

Modalists attempted to resolve the mystery of the Trinity by holding that the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost are modes, aspects or roles, of God. This anti-Trinitarian view contends that the three "persons" are not distinct persons, but titles which describe how humanity has interacted with or experienced God. In the role of the Father, God is the provider and creator of all. In the mode of the Son, man experiences God in the flesh, as a human, fully man and fully God.

God manifests himself as the Holy Spirit by his actions on Earth and within the lives of Christians. This view is known as Sabellianism, and was rejected as heresy by the Ecumenical Councils although it is still prevalent today among those denominations known as "Oneness" and "Apostolic" Pentecostal Christians, the largest of which is the United Pentecostal Church International. Trinitarianism, on the other hand, insists that the Father, Son and Spirit simultaneously exist as three persons in one essence, each fully the same God.

The doctrine developed into its present form precisely through this kind of confrontation with alternatives; and the process of refinement continues in the same way. Even now, ecumenical dialogue between Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Roman Catholic, the Assyrian Church of the East, Anglican and Trinitarian Protestants, seeks an expression of Trinitarian and Christological doctrine which will overcome the extremely subtle differences that have largely contributed to dividing them into separate communities. The doctrine of the Trinity is therefore symbolic, somewhat paradoxically, of both division and unity.

source: wikipedia

The meaning of trinity according to some Trinitarians

Catholic

“The trinity is a wonderful mystery. No one understands it. The most learned theologian, the holiest pope, the greatest saint, all are mystified by it as the child of seven” (Martin J. Scott)

“In this one God there are three distinct persons, -- the father, the son and the holy ghost, who are perfectly equal to each other” James cardinal gibbons

Eastern Orthodox

“Orthodoxy worships one god in the trinity and the trinity in unity, neither confusing the persons nor dividing the substance” Arthur Douropolus

Lutheran

“The only true God is the triune God: Father, Son and the Holy ghost, three distinct persons in one divine being, or essence” BOOK: A Short explanation of Dr. Martin Luther’s Small catechism

Methodist

“We believe the one God reveals himself as the trinity: Father, son and Holy spirit, distinct but inseparable, eternally one in essence and power” BOOK: The book of discipline of the united methodist church

Baptist

Does Baptist accept the doctrine of trinity?

“Most Baptist do. This is a basic doctrine of Christianity… The sublime mystery of the trinity, of the eternal and infinite essence of God manifested in three persons—these, the Baptist leaves to the theologians to interpret. He accepts them.” William B. Lipphard

What the bible said about God, Christ and the Holy Spirit
 
About the True God
 Jesus Christ stated:

“And this is eternal life: that people know you, the only true God, and that they know Jesus Christ, the One you sent.” john 17:3

Apostle Paul said:

“Even though there are things called gods, in heaven or on earth (and there are many "gods" and "lords"), for us there is only one God—our Father. All things came from him, and we live for him. And there is only one Lord—Jesus Christ. All things were made through him, and we also were made through him.” I Cor. 8: 5-6

On the song of Moses: 

"I will proclaim the name of the Lord. Oh, praise the greatness of our God!Is this the way you repay the Lord, you foolish and unwise people? ""Is he not your Father, your Creator, who made you and formed you?" Deut. 32:4, 7

About Jesus Christ

Jesus Christ declared:

And this is eternal life: that people know you, the only true God, and that theyknow Jesus Christ, the One you sent.” John 17:3

“Jesus said to them, "If God were really your Father, you would love me, because I came from God and now I am here. I did not come by my own authority; God sent me.” john 8:42

“I can do nothing alone. I judge only the way I am told, so my judgment is fair. I don't try to please myself, but I try to please the One who sent me.” john 5:30

“You heard me say to you, 'I am going, but I am coming back to you.' If you loved me, you should be happy that I am going back to the Father, because he is greater than I am.” john 14:28

“I am a man who has told you the truth which I heard from God, but you are trying to kill me. Abraham did nothing like that.” john 8:40

“Jesus said to her, "Don't hold on to me, because I have not yet gone up to the Father. But go to my brothers and tell them, 'I am going back to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.' "” john 20:17

About the Holy Spirit

“But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you.” john 14:26

“I will send you the Helper from the Father; he is the Spirit of truth who comes from the Father. When he comes, he will tell about me,” john 15:26

SHOULD WE BE SURPRISED if not all men know the truth about the TRUE GOD?

“But we know that there is only one God, the Father, who created everything, and we live for him. And there is only one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom God made everything and through whom we have been given life. However, not all believers know this. Some are accustomed to thinking of idols as being real, so when they eat food that has been offered to idols, they think of it as the worship of real gods, and their weak consciences are violated. “ I Cor. 8:6-7