Friday, April 30, 2010

Sagot sa mga Kababawan ng mga Manolista

The Lord Jesus reigns in Heaven

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "SINO BA ANG DIOS NG ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH?":

woo pde na.. ang galing.. wait!

ang gulo nga e..

pero bakit kaya napunta ang usapan agad s INC waaaaaaaaa INC lng ba nagpahayag nyan? kawawang nilalang ka Abe.. abangan ko ang mukha mo s public.. sana ikaw ang makipagdebate.. sa INC sana lang.

ito ang tanong ko

BAKIT ANG GULO GULO NG SAMAHAN NYO?

BAKIT ANG GULO GULO SA SIMBAHAN NYO sa TUWING PAGSAMBA?

BAKIT WALA PA RING PAGKAKAISA SAMAHAN NYO?

alam ko na ang sagot dito.. (tuwing may sunog lang kayo nagkakaisa) pero sa aral WALA. o ano gusto mo ng sample.? galing pa sa PARI?

kawawa naman kayo.. kasi dito lang kayo hanggan sa internet :(

Posted by Anonymous to The Splendor of the Church at January 16, 2010 6:18 PM

_________________________________

Beltran, O.P. said...

@ Anonymous MANALISTA above:

wahahaha. palagay ko wala sa katinuan itong anonymous sa itaas.. akalain mo un?

[pero bakit kaya napunta ang usapan agad s INC waaaaaaaaa INC lng ba nagpahayag nyan? kawawang nilalang ka Abe.. abangan ko ang mukha mo s public.. sana ikaw ang makipagdebate.. sa INC sana lang.]

INC LANG DAW BA ANG NAGPAHAYAG NIYAN? ay hindi ciemre. ikaw naman pala eh masyado kang nagpapauna ehh. siyempre hindi lang kayo ang nagpahayag niyan. marami ng NAUNA SA INYO na nagpahayag niyan ano?? KINOPYA NGA LANG NG ANGHEL mo yan ehh.. hahaha.. mangongopya't walang sariling kaniya..

Si fr. Abe laging humaharap sa publiko yan noh.. malas mo lang hindi mo nakita .. hahaha.. AT EHEM!!! EHEM !! EHEM!!! .. may kilala din akong HINDI MAKAHARAP SA PUBLIC ehh.. oo humaharap cia, kaso sa PUBLIC OFFICIALS nga lang.. hahahaha.. nakatago lagi sa malaking kapilya sa may kaDILIMAN.. hahaha

FR. ABE: Ito bang anonymous na ito e HUMAHARAP? Hinde, kasi ANONYMOUS e. Nakatago ang muka, pagkakilanlan at pagkatao. Gusto nya pala akong humarap e bakit siya nakatago. He, he, he... Magaling manira kala mo sila ang humaharap. Pag harapan na magtatago din sa saya ni Ventilacion at Parba. Kahit mga pastor sa local hindi humaharap ng debate sa mga local debatista. Nagtatawag pa ng tulong sa central.

[BAKIT ANG GULO GULO NG SAMAHAN NYO?]

Bakit ang gulo ng samahan namin? aba.. ikaw lang ata nag papagulo eh.. hahahaha.. eh HUNGHANG ka pala ehh.. oh eto..

The Roman Catholic Church or Catholic Church is the Christian church in full communion with the Bishop of Rome, currently Pope Benedict XVI. It traces its origins to the original Christian community FOUNDED BY JESUS CHRIST and spread by the Twelve Apostles, in particular Saint Peter.

The Catholic Church is by far the largest Christian church and the LARGEST ORGANIZED BODY of any world religion.

oi.. kitang kita oh. NON - BIASED SOURCE YAN.. ang Katoliko daw ang LARGEST ORGANIZED. (hindi magulo) hahaha.. at ang kagandahan dun FOUNDED BY CHRIST. eh kung tutulan mo yan wala na kami paki dun. hindi naman kami sumulat niyan ehh. NON - BIASED SOURCE yan.. hahahaha unlike sa kulto mo.. FELIX MANALO ANG FUNDADOR.. hahaha

FR. ABE: ANG UTAK N'YA ANG MAGULO. He, he, he...

[BAKIT ANG GULO GULO SA SIMBAHAN NYO sa TUWING PAGSAMBA?]

Eh kasi marami kami. inggit ka naman. hahaha.. at wag mong sabihin na magulo. baka ikaw lang naguguluhan. tulad ng sa Quiapo. magulo tlga ang itsura nuon sa dami ng tao. pero pagdating ng PAGSAMBA NAMIN (BANAL NA MISA na wala kayo)eh LAHAT AY OBLIGADO MAKINIG SA MISA. may mga USHERS NGA KAMI ehh.. ung diakono't diakonesa ninyo. sa amin mga ushers lang.. hahaha .. and considering na magulo nga ung iilan sa amin.. dahil sa dami ng tao. MAY NAALALA AKO, 95TH ANNIVERSARY NG ISANG KULTO SA PILIPINAS. nako after ng event eh NAGKALAT ANG MGA BASURA SA ROXAS BLVD. tsk tsk... sino kaya un? ang gulo nila noh??

tsaka pag sinabing CATHOLIC CHURCH eh pangkalahatan hindi lang sa Pinas. eh sa Amerika nga eh.. ang mga simbahan dun. may kanya kanyang book of songs ang mga tao.. at napaka tahimik. sa amin din meron. gusto mo makita? sama kita.. hahaha..

FR. ABE: Ang mga Banal na Misa ng Iglesia Catolica ay palabas sa TV linggo linggo on several Channels. Subalit napaka ayos. Tahimik at Solemn. Yung iba dyan MARAMING DRAMA. May sigawan, may iyakan... PARANG MGA BALIW. Yung iba may yugyugan parang concert... Ha, ha, ha... Ang sa Catholic Church pure, simple, beautiful and majestic. Solemn and Dignified. SA MGA INC SINASARADO ANG PINTO PARA WALANG MAKALABAS PARANG KULUNGAN. MAY IN AND OUT RECORDS PA PARANG SA MGA SECURITY GUARDS. ANG INTENSIYON KAYA KINUKULONG AY PARA WALANG MAKALIGTAS SA ABULOY. Ha, ha, ha...

[ BAKIT WALA PA RING PAGKAKAISA SAMAHAN NYO? ]

ahahahaha.. eh engot pala talaga to eh.. haha.. TATAGAL BA NAMAN KAMI NG 2OOO YEARS KUNG WLANG PAGKAKAISA SA AMIN?

"Ang Bawa't kaharian nagkakabaha bahagi laban sa kaniyang sarili ay MAWAWASAK" (Mateo 12:25)

oh eto baliw pala tlga to ehh.. hahahaha mismong salita ni Cristo hindi tinatanggap.. tsk tsk

FR. ABE: Aba-aba, kahit more than 1 billion kami sa dami ay nagkakaisa kami sa Pagsamba, sa Doctrina at sa Principio Moralidad, pati sa Organization. Kayo hindi nagkakaisa kundi ISANG UTAK LANG ANG NAGPAPASUNOD SA MGA MIEMBRONG UTO-UTO. Pati pagboto walang kalayaan. Kami nagkakaisa subalit may respeto sa kalayaan. [BAKIT WALA PA RING PAGKAKAISA SAMAHAN NYO? ]

gaya nga ng nasabi ni CRISTO. mwawasak ang walang pagkakaisa. ang tagal na namin ehh.. hindi pa hinuhulog ung FALLEN ANGEL mong si manalo eh matatag na ang Iglesia Katolika. kaninong chismosa mo naman narinig yan.. eh un nga ung nakakatuwa sa amin eh. MY IBA IBA MANG SAMAHAN DITO EH IISA LANG ANG PANANAMAPALATAYA NAMIN AT IISA ANG PAMUMUNO. LAHAT UNDER NG PAMAMAHALA NG PAPA SA ROMA.. chismosa ka ahh.. hahaha

"May iba't ibang pag gawa DATAPUWA'T IISANG DIYOS" ( 1 Corinto 12:6)

at kung tutuusin nga hindi kami NAGDADAG DAG SA BIBLIA EH. PANSININ MO Kung may isip ka

"ISANG PANGINOON, ISANG PANANAMPALATAYA AT ISANG BAUTISMO" (EFESO 4:5)

see? samin lang natupad yan WALANG DAGDAG. iisa ang aming PANGINOON. iisa ang aming DOGMA na pinaniniwalaan, at iisa ang aming bautismo WAIT!!!

WALA ATA AKONG NABASA SA TALATA NA IISANG BOTO?? oopss. hahahahaha

FR. ABE: Talagang walang nakasulat na iisang BOTO. Walang wala. AT WALA RING SINABI NA ISANG PAMILYA LANG ANG MAMUMUNO SA SANTA IGLESIA. SA KAHARIAN NI DAVID, OO. Pero ang Kaharian ni David ay nasa pamumuno ni Cristo at hindi ni Manalo at ng kanyang mga anak at apo.

[tuwing may sunog lang kayo nagkakaisa) pero sa aral WALA. o ano gusto mo ng sample.? galing pa sa PARI?

kawawa naman kayo.. kasi dito lang kayo hanggan sa internet :(]

Tuwing may sunog??hahaah.. binatangera ka ahh? hahaha.. SAN KA NAMAN NAKAKITA NG CHARITY FOR FIRE VICTIMS ONLY ang mga katoliko??

eh sa NOBLE PEACE PRIZE NGA LANG ehh.. si Mo. teresa of Calcuta na ang isang ehemplo (isa sa napakarami)

meron na ba kayong NOBLE PEACE PRIZE WINNER? na nanggagamot sa mga MAY KETONG ng libre tulad ni Mo. Teresa?

parang wala pa ata akong nakikitang NAKA AMERICANA NA NAGPAPANGGAP NA MINISTRO na nakagawa nuon?

SIGE NGA? nagawa na ba ni MANALONG-HUNGHANG yung nagawa ni Mo. Teresa na humawak at mag alaga ng mga may ketong sa kanilang sariling palasyo

hahaha.. at anong tungkol sa aral wala? excuse me. napaka rami ngang aral sa amin eh.. hahahaha.. baka hindi mo pa alam. tanong mo muna sa kin..

FR. ABE: ANG OPISYAL NA ARAL AT MORAL TEACHINGS NG IGLESIA CATOLICA AY NAKASULAT SA ISANG AKLAT NG KATEKISMO NA BINABASA NG LAHAT NG CATOLICO SA BUONG MUNDO. SILA HINDI NAKALIMBAG ANG KUMPLETONG ARAL. TINATAGO. TAPOS BAWAL MAGBASA NG BIBLIA ANG MGA MIEMBRO. PASTOR LANG ANG DAPAT MAGTAGLAY NG BIBLIA.

[kawawa naman kayo.. kasi dito lang kayo hanggan sa internet :(]

niyaks!! hahaha.. hanggang internet lang ? hahaha.. ngaun nga may ilan s amin nasa HAITI EH. kayo ba? hahaha.. tsaka atleast AVAILABLE KAMI SA INTERNET PUBLICLY. di tulad ng kulto ninyo. private lang ang official website.. hahaha eww..

FR. ABE: MAS NAKAKAHIYA YON, IMAGINE ANG OFFICIAL WEBSITE AY HINDI PUBLICLY OPEN. TAPOS AYAW NINYONG I-POST SA INTERNET ANG MGA PASUGO. ANG CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA, CATECHISMS AND SPEECHES NG POPES NAMIN PATI MGA ENCYCLICAL LETTERS NYA AY PUBLISHED LAHAT SA INTERNET AND IN PRINTED BOOKS. THEY ARE IN PUBLIC DOMAIN. WALA KAMING TINATAGO. KAYO TAGO NG TAGO SA KADILIMAN. He, he, he...

January 16, 2010 11:17 PM

THE EASTERN AND WESTERN SPIRITUALITY OF THE SACRED ARTS

Here are the examples of Eastern and Western iconography. The one on the top is the marble statue of Mary from Lancaster Cathedral while the two below show an Eastern icon [left] and Western madonna painting [right]. Each is a masterpiece artistic representation of the Virgin of Nazareth.
passionately_papist said...

tungkol naman po sa sacred images...

diba po panahon pa ni Constantine e may mga rebulto na? kung ganon bakit po yung mga easterns ngayon (catholic or orthodox) e puro flat 2d images lang? before the schism po ba restricted to 2d images lang ang mga easterns?

April 30, 2010 4:07 PM

Fr. Abe, CRS said...

Honestly, I don't know the deeper explanation why the Easterners prefer the 2d icons and mosaics rather than the statues we have. I am not an iconographer, a historian of art and expert on Eastern Spirituality. I will only share my little knowledge of the difference between the two.
The Bible speaks of wall images in the Temple and also of statues of cherubims, lions, oxens, etc. Thus, we are sure that the use of statues in the house of worships, on altars and sanctuaries are Biblically founded. You can find them in the SACRED ART label of this blog.

I think the primary answer is cultural reason which became a distinctive source of Eastern and Western spirituality. Because according to Apostolic Tradition St. Luke was a doctor and a painter. He used to do icons. Then the monks and early Christians in the East and in Rome imitated him. The Easterners fell in love with iconography culturally since then they preferred that Sacred Art. They developed a theology that Icons are not mere representations but they give the Sacramental presence of what they convey.

Those in the West however are more practical in their approach. Icons are mere representations of the person or things tha they convey so any form of art are equal in this regard. Since statues are more realistic then the Westerners have given them more attention. For us the clearer the image the better the representation. That is why our paintings are more realistic and colorful.

The Eastern icons prefer only natural colors and only distinct lines. They have special meaning for that. THEY WANT TO PRESERVE THE MYSTERY OF THE LORD AND THE HEAVENLY THINGS by not conveying them realistically in profaned colors of this world. The West counters that we prefer the use of all colors available on earth and be realistic as possible because we must use the God-given talents and the materials of these world to better understand the things of God and heavenly realities.

BUT, I DON'T THINK THAT THIS IS A SERIOUS CONTENTION BETWEEN THE EASTERN AND THE WESTERN CHURCH. Both position is good and have valuable points for our Christian spirituality.

April 30, 2010 4:53 PM

TUGON SA HAMON NG ANONYMOUS MANALISTA

Christ in Heaven

This message was received by my inbox way back January 2010. I was not able to give it attention due to hectic schedules and the number of messages piled up and only recently did it get catch my attention. Here it is and my response:

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "SINO BA ANG DIOS NG ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH?":

Kung magaling kayo sa Christology, sige nga kaya nyo bang sagutin ito: (kapag nasagot nyo yan, sa tingin ko may kakayahan na kayong matalo mga ministro namin)

1) Ano masasabi nyo sa 1 Cor. 15:47 na taong galing sa langit na yun si Cristo?

2) Ano masasabi nyo sa 1 Timoteo 2:5 at Juan 8:40 na pagkakilala ni Pablo at Cristo sa talata ay tao si Cristo?

3) Ano rin masasabi nyo sa Juan 17:3 na sabi ni Cristo na "makilala ka nilang iisang DIOS na tunay" at hindi "makilala tayong iisang DIOS na tunay"?

4) Alam nyo ba na paniniwalang pagano na yung DIOS eh nagkatawang tao kasi si Pablo at Bernabe napagkamalang mga dios na bumaba sa lupa sa Listra? (Gawa 14:8-15)

5) Ano masasabi nyo na anak rin ng DIOS si Adam? kasi sa inyo ang anak ng DIOS eh DIOS rin po tama? (Luke 3:38)

Padre, dito na kayo sumagot para di kayo gumawa pa ng isang blog.

peace tayo Padre ah. magalang ako magsalita ngayon I hope for your nice reply. di kayo mga ADD na nakaugalian ng iba sa kanila na manigaw o magmura kapag naatake

nga pala Padre, may youtube video ka bang maipapakita na natalo ng sinong Katoliko ang isa sa ministro namin na ang paksa sa debate ay PAGKADIOS NI CRISTO?

kung wala kayong maipakita, meaning lagi kaming nananalo doon.

Posted by Anonymous to The Splendor of the Church at January 16, 2010 12:30 PM
______________________________________
REPLY OF FR. ABE:

[Kung magaling kayo sa Christology, sige nga kaya nyo bang sagutin ito: (kapag nasagot nyo yan, sa tingin ko may kakayahan na kayong matalo mga ministro namin)]

NAG-ILUSYON KA NAMAN. AKALA MO BA AY GANON KAHIRAP ANG MGA KATANUNGAN MO. WAG KANG MANGARAP NG DILAT. WALANG PASKO SA BUWAN NG MAYO.

[1) Ano masasabi nyo sa 1 Cor. 15:47 na taong galing sa langit na yun si Cristo?]

YAN AY PABOR SA IGLESIA CATOLICA KASI WALANG SINASABI D’YAN NA SI CRISTO AY ‘TAO LANG’ AT WALA RING SINASABI NA “SI CRISTO AY HINDI DIOS”. NANINIWALA KAMI NA SI CRISTO AY TAONG GALING SA LANGIT DAHIL SIYA AY DIOS NA NAGKATAWANG TAO. KAYA NGA TAO NA GALING SA LANGIT. PERO BAGO SYA NAGING TAO DIOS SIYA AT HINDI NAWAWALA ANG KANYANG PAGKADIOS.

Kung si Cristo ay TAO LANG dapat ang kanyang katawan ay KATAWANG LUPA... YARI SA ALABOK dahil ang TAO LANG tulad ni Adan at n gating mga katawan ay galing sa ALABOK NG LUPA at NAGBABALIK SA ALABOK. Ganito ang sabi ng Biblia:

Gen 2:7 “At nilalang ng Panginoong Dios ang TAO sa alabok ng lupa, at hiningahan ang kaniyang mga butas ng ilong ng hininga ng buhay; at ang tao ay naging kaluluwang may buhay.”

Ngayon, si Cristo ay GALING SA LANGIT AT HINDI SA LUPA. Ibig sabihin HINDI SYA TAO LANG. Siya ay Dios na NAGKATAWANG TAO. Ito ay pinatutunayan ni San Juan Evangelista:

John 1:1 Nang pasimula siya ang Verbo, at ang Verbo ay sumasa Dios, at ANG VERBO AY DIOS.

Kitam, ANG VERBO AY DIOS. Hindi Tao lang! Isa pa, si Adan ang unang Tao hindi si Cristo. Subalit ang sabi sa PASIMULA siya ang Verbo. Ibig sabihin wala pa ang daigdig at ang tao nasa langit na si Cristo bilang DIOS. Naging tao lamang siya ng NINAIS Niyang MAGKATAWANG TAO:

John 1:14 At NAGKATAWANG-TAO ANG VERBO, at tumahan sa gitna natin (at nakita namin ang kaniyang kaluwalhatian, kaluwalhatian gaya ng sa bugtong ng Ama), na puspos ng biyaya at katotohanan.

ANG VERBO DATING HINDI TAO; SIYA AY DATING DIOS. NAGING TAO SIYA NG NAGKATAWANG TAO. KAYA TUNAY NA DIOS AT TUNAY NA TAO. SINASABI NG BIBLIA NA SIYA AY DIOS. SABI RIN NG BIBLIA SIYA AY TAO. KAYA ANG TAMANG DOCTRINA: SI CRISTO AY DIOS AT TAO. ITO ANG ARAL NG IGLESIA CATOLICA.

[2) Ano masasabi nyo sa 1 Timoteo 2:5 at Juan 8:40 na pagkakilala ni Pablo at Cristo sa talata ay tao si Cristo?]

GANON DIN. WALANG SINASABI SA TALATA NA SI CRISTO AY ‘TAO LANG’. WALA RING SINASABI SA MGA TALATANG IYAN NA SI CRISTO AY ‘HINDI DIOS’. HINDI NAMAN NAMIN SINASABI NA HINDI TAO SI CRISTO E. Anong salungat duon? May salungatan kung sinasabi naming 'HINDI TAO SI CRISTO'. He, he, he...

[3) Ano rin masasabi nyo sa Juan 17:3 na sabi ni Cristo na "makilala ka nilang iisang DIOS na tunay" at hindi "makilala tayong iisang DIOS na tunay"?]

SIEMPRE ANG INTENSIYON NI CRISTO AY LUWALHATIIN ANG AMA HINDI ANG KANYANG SARILI. SUBALIT ANG NAGLUWALHATI KAY CRISTO AY ANG DIOS AMA AT ANG ESPIRITU SANTO NA NAGBIGAY NG INSPIRASYON SA BIBLIA:

Heb 1:8 Nguni't tungkol sa Anak ay sinasabi, Ang iyong luklukan, Oh Dios, ay magpakailan man; At ang setro ng katuwiran ay siyang setro ng iyong kaharian.

YAN ANG SABI NG DIOS AMA. ANG ANAK AY DIOS. KINIKILALA NI CRISTO NA DIOS ANG AMA AT ANG AMA KINIKILALA NA DIOS SI CRISTO. ANG INC TALIWAS SA SALITA NG AMA.

NGAYON, MAY NAKASULAT BA SA BIBLIA NA ‘PEKENG DIOS’ SI CRISTO? KUNG ANG AMA ANG NAGSABI NA DIOS SI CRISTO E DI TUNAY NA DIOS SIYA.

[4) Alam nyo ba na paniniwalang pagano na yung DIOS eh nagkatawang tao kasi si Pablo at Bernabe napagkamalang mga dios na bumaba sa lupa sa Listra? (Gawa 14:8-15)]

Tignan natin at pag-aralan ang talatang iyan:

Act 14:8 At sa Listra ay may isang lalaking nakaupo, na sa mga paa'y walang lakas, pilay mula pa sa tiyan ng kaniyang ina, na kailan ma'y hindi nakalakad.
Act 14:9 Narinig nitong nagsasalita si Pablo: na, nang titigan siya ni Pablo, at makitang may pananampalataya upang mapagaling,

Act 14:10 Ay nagsabi ng malakas na tinig, Magtindig kang matuwid sa iyong mga paa. At siya'y lumukso at lumakad.

Act 14:11 At nang makita ng karamihan ang ginawa ni Pablo, ay nagsigawan sila, na sinasabi sa wikang Licaonia, Ang mga dios ay nagsibaba sa atin sa anyo ng mga tao.

Act 14:12 At tinawag nilang Jupiter, si Bernabe; at Mercurio, si Pablo, sapagka't siya ang pangulong tagapagsalita.

Act 14:13 At ang saserdote ni Jupiter na ang kaniyang templo ay nasa harap ng bayan, ay nagdala ng mga baka't mga putong na bulaklak sa mga pintuang-daan, at ibig maghaing kasama ng mga karamihan.

Act 14:14 Datapuwa't nang marinig ito ng mga apostol, na si Bernabe at si Pablo, ay hinapak nila ang kanilang mga damit, at nagsipanakbo sa gitna ng karamihan, na nagsisigaw,

Act 14:15 At nagsisipagsabi, Mga ginoo, bakit ninyo ginagawa ang mga bagay na ito? Kami'y mga tao ring may mga karamdamang gaya ninyo, at nangagdadala ng mabubuting balita sa inyo, upang mula sa mga bagay na itong walang kabuluhan ay magsibalik kayo sa Dios na buhay, na gumawa ng langit at ng lupa at ng dagat, at ng lahat ng nasa mga yaon:

Act 14:16 Na nang mga panahong nakaraan ay pinabayaan niya ang lahat ng mga bansa ay magsilakad sa kanilang mga sariling daan.

Act 14:17 At gayon man ay hindi nagpabayang di nagbigay patotoo, tungkol sa kaniyang sarili, na gumawa ng mabuti at nagbigay sa inyo ng ulang galing sa langit at ng mga panahong sagana, na pinupuno ang inyong mga puso ng pagkain at ng katuwaan.

Act 14:18 At sa mga pananalitang ito ay bahagya na nilang napigil ang karamihan sa paghahain sa kanila.

Ayan malinaw ang sabi ng mga Pagano sa v. 12. Ang aral nila ang mga dios-diosan na bumaba sa lupa ay si JUPITER at si MERCURIO. ANG TURO NILA ANG MGA PAGANONG DIOS NILA AY ‘BUMABA sa lupa’.

ANG TURO NG MGA CATOLICO SI CRISTO AY DIOS NA NAGKATAWANG-TAO. HINDI DIOS NA BUMABA SA LUPA. KUNDI NAGKATAWANG TAO. ITO AY BASE SA JOHN 1:1 AT JOHN 1:14:

John 1:1 Nang pasimula siya ang Verbo, at ang Verbo ay sumasa Dios, at ANG VERBO AY DIOS.

Kitam, ANG VERBO AY DIOS. Hindi Tao lang! Isa pa, si Adan ang unang Tao hindi si Cristo. Subalit ang sabi sa PASIMULA siya ang Verbo. Ibig sabihin wala pa ang daigdig at ang tao nasa langit na si Cristo bilang DIOS. Naging tao lamang siya ng NINAIS Niyang MAGKATAWANG TAO:

John 1:14 At NAGKATAWANG-TAO ANG VERBO, at tumahan sa gitna natin (at nakita namin ang kaniyang kaluwalhatian, kaluwalhatian gaya ng sa bugtong ng Ama), na puspos ng biyaya at katotohanan

[5) Ano masasabi nyo na anak rin ng DIOS si Adam? kasi sa inyo ang anak ng DIOS eh DIOS rin po tama? (Luke 3:38)]

Ang lahat ng tao ay anak ng Dios dahil nilikha tayo ng Dios. Subalit si Cristo ay UNIQUE kesa ke Adan at sa ating lahat. DAHIL SI CRISTO AY DIOS... KAYA NGA ANG TAWAG SA KANYA AY BUGTONG NA ANAK NG AMA. IBIG SABIHIN PAREHO SILA NG KALIKASAN NG AMA.

ANG PAGKADIOS NI CRISTO AY DALISAY NA PINATOTOHANAN NG BIBLIA:

ANG BIBLIA AY TINAWAG DIN SI CRISTONG IISA AT TUNAY NA DIOS! Saan natin mababasa yan? Dito po:

JOHN 1:18 [New International Version] "No-one has ever seen God, but GOD THE ONE AND ONLY, who is at the Father's side, has made him known."

SINO PO ANG TINAWAG NA 'GOD THE ONE AND ONLY'? ANG ANAK PO NA NAKALUKLOK SA KANAN NG AMA. SI CRISTO PO IYAN. MATINDING SALIN NGA PO IYAN NG BIBLIA SAPAGKAT TINAWAG SI CRISTO NA IISANG DIOS AT KAISA-ISANG DIOS = 'ONE AND ONLY'!!!

Meron pa pong isa pang Katibayan:

JOHN 1:18 [Contemporary English Version] "No one has ever seen God. The only Son, who is TRULY GOD and is closest to the Father, has shown us what God is like."

AYAN. MALINAW NA MALINAW. ANG ANAK AY TUNAY NA DIOS = TRULY GOD. HINDI PEKENG DIOS. HINDI DIOS-DIOSAN. HINDI MABABANG DIOS. KUNDI TUNAY NA DIOS.

SI CRISTO AY TUNAY NA DIOS AT IISANG DIOS AYON SA BIBLIA. AT ITO AY PINAGTIBAY NG AMA MISMO.

NGAYON, SAGUTIN MO AKO. SAAN MAKIKITA SA BIBLIA NA ‘TAO LANG SI CRISTO’? SAAN MABABASA SA BIBLIA NA ‘SI CRISTO AY HINDI DIOS’?

[Padre, dito na kayo sumagot para di kayo gumawa pa ng isang blog.]
Bakit saan pa ba ako sasagot? Isa lang naman ang Blog ko, meron ba akong ibang Blog? He, he, he...

[peace tayo Padre ah. magalang ako magsalita ngayon I hope for your nice reply. di kayo mga ADD na nakaugalian ng iba sa kanila na manigaw o magmura kapag naatake]

Yes, magalang ka. Walang murahan. Doctrina at Talata lang tayo. He, he, he...

[nga pala Padre, may youtube video ka bang maipapakita na natalo ng sinong Katoliko ang isa sa ministro namin na ang paksa sa debate ay PAGKADIOS NI CRISTO?]

YES, ANG KEATING-VENTILACION DEBATE. WASAK SI VENTILACION MO DUON.

[kung wala kayong maipakita, meaning lagi kaming nananalo doon.]

ILUSYON MO LANG IYAN.

US Catholics donate $2.7 million to help Church in Latin America

The interior of the Metropolitan Cathedral in Buenos Aires, Argentina

Washington D.C., April 28 (CNA) .- On April 28, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops announced that they awarded over $2 million in grants to the Church in Latin America.

The $2,777,917 raised through the Collection for the Church in Latin America was distributed to 128 projects throughout 23 countries, with $972,869 going to the earthquake-ravaged areas of Haiti and Chile, reported the Bishops' Subcommittee for the Church in Latin America.

"The projects approved by the subcommittee show the Church in action: supporting thousands of priests, sisters and laity working every day to bring the Good News to some of our poorest brothers and sisters," said Archbishop JosƩ H. Gomez, Coadjutor Archbishop of Los Angeles and chairman of the subcommittee.

"From Caracas to Cochabamba, from Argentina to the Antilles, the Collection for the Church in Latin America helps to strengthen communion within the Church in the American continent, which is home to half the world's Catholics," he added.

In Haiti alone, the subcommittee's aid will help provide temporary parish centers and classrooms to 27 parishes as well as provide supplies to the national seminary. The aid will also supply radio transmission equipment for Catholic Radio Soleil in Port-au-Prince.

The subcommittee also approved funding for 20 temporary parishes in Chile, whose 11 dioceses were impacted by disastrous earthquake in Feb. An estimated 80 percent of the chapels in Chile were destroyed or left unusable.

Funding for religious and clergy personnel in 14 countries totaled more than $400,000. The subcommittee also provided grants to support indigenous faith communities in Ecuador, Guatemala, Venezuela, Mexico and Nicaragua.

Dapat Bang Iboto sa Posisyong Political ang Lider ng Relihiyon?

Dati: JESUS IS THE ANSWER daw. Ngayon, EDDIE SIEMPRE... Ayaw sa larawan ni Jesus pero mga larawan nya nakalagay sa mga posters at naglalakihan sa mga entablado. Naku naman... Hay, pulitika nga naman.

Anonymous said...

si bro. eddie po pabor sa death penalty

sa U.S. po pag ang isang Katoliko ay bumoto sa isang pulitiko na pabor sa abortion isa po itong kasalanan at bawal po sya tumanggap ng komunyon

nangangahulugan po ba na kasalanan para sa isang katolikong pinoy na bumoto kay bro eddie v?

salamat po

April 30, 2010 8:53 AM

Fr. Abe, CRS said...

Walang aral ang Simbahang Catolico na kasalanan ang bumoto sa kandidatong iba ang relihiyon. We are free to vote kung sino ang inaakala nating nararapat mamuno ng bansa. Hindi naman porke pro Death Penalty si Eddie Villanueva e kasalanan na ang pagboto sa kanya dahil marami namang katangian ang isang kandidato liban sa kanyang isang pananaw sa isang partikular na issue lamang.

Subalit bilang mga Catolico tayo ay tinuturuan at ginagabayan ng Santa Iglesia na bumuto ng mga Kandidatong magtataguyod ng kabutihan, moralidad at pananampalataya. Si Eddie Villanueva ba ay magiging tunay na tagapaglingkod ng bayan o kikilos lang para itaguyod ang kapakanan ng kanyang relihiyon kung saan siya ng nagtatag at nagtaguyod at namumuno? NASAAN ANG SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE?

Kapag ang mga paring Catolico ay gustong tumakbo tinatanggal sila sa functions of priesthood. Subalit si Eddie Villanueva ay pastor pa rin at ginagamit ang mga Prayer Rallies nila para sa kanyang mga kampanya. Tama ba ito?

Sa ating mga Catolico magbigay lang ng opinyon sa pulitika ang mga Obispo natin e sinasabihan na agad ng pamumulitika. Si Eddie Villanueva PUNO, LIDER AT FOUNDER ng Jesus is Lord [JIL] two-time presidential candidate pa. HINDI DAPAT ISANGKALAN ANG RELIHIYON PARA SA AMBISYONG POLITICAL. Yan ang dahilang kung bakit hindi ako sang-ayon na tumakbo sa pulitica ang mga pari at pastor at ministro. Kasi kung hindi pari si Among Ed kilala ba siya ng tao? Kung hindi Born Again head pastor si Eddie Villanueva kilala ba siya ng mga tao?

ANG TAONG BAYAN ANG HUHUSGA. ISINUKA NA SIYA NOONG NAKARAANG ELECTION. TIGNAN NATIN NGAYON.

April 30, 2010 10:02 AM

Thursday, April 29, 2010

ST. THOMAS AQUINAS AND THE UNIVERSITIES

St. Thomas Aquinas, the Angelic Doctor

Archbishop Speaks on Aquinas and Universities

"We Must Reaffirm the Passion for Truth That Animated St. Thomas"

HOUSTON, Texas, APRIL 24, 2010 (Zenit.org).- Here is a compilation of excerpts from a Jan. 28 public lecture given by Archbishop Michael Miller of Vancouver, British Columbia, at the University of St. Thomas in Houston. The lecture was published April 14 by L'Osservatore Romano.

* * *
The Church's "Common Doctor:" Aquinas and the Contemporary Catholic University

St Thomas himself never put his mind to worrying about how to think about a Catholic university of his time or any other. His writings never touch upon matters of faculty, students or curriculum as they concern us today. Yet he does propose specific views about the acquisition of knowledge about truth and the relationship of faith and reason which are, I believe, of permanent value to understanding how the contemporary Catholic university should carry out its teaching and research.

After a look at the study of Thomism in centers of higher education universities and seminaries following the revival initiated by Pope Leo XIII, what I suggest in this lecture are several reasons why St Thomas is rightly called "a light for the Church and the whole world", above all the world of the Catholic Academy at the dawn of this Third Christian Millennium.

Second Vatican Council: Apex and Decline

Following the long tradition according official approval to Thomas' teaching, which the Church used so widely and successfully "as an instrument superbly adapted to her purposes, thus casting the mantle of her own magisterial authority over Aquinas", the Second Vatican Council followed suit. It highly praised Thomas, whose thought had prepared for it in so many ways.

The Decree on Priestly Formation, for example, recommended that seminarians be taught according to "that philosophical heritage which is perennially valid". Moreover, their dogmatic theology should be taught so as to illumine the mysteries of salvation as completely as possible, and seminarians "should learn to penetrate them more deeply with the help of speculation, under the guidance of St Thomas, and to perceive their interconnections".

In like fashion, the Declaration on Christian Education praised Aquinas' teaching for showing how faith and science can work in harmony in Catholic colleges and universities. For the first time an ecumenical council recommended an individual theologian for study, and they gave that honor to St Thomas, even though the Fathers themselves made less use of him in their final documents than in those previously prepared for their deliberations.

Ironically, right around the same time as the Council, a decline what some have called a "collapse" in the study of St Thomas was taking place. Several reasons for this slow falling into neglect can be suggested. First, the renewal of biblical scholarship prompted by Pius XII's Divino Afflante Spiritu, published in 1943, introduced scriptural themes and categories more directly into theology, thereby making Thomas seem outdated. This was accompanied by a more general ressourcement among theologians, a return to the study of the Church Fathers, thereby bypassing the Scholastics, including Aquinas, in favor of the tradition of a presumed earlier golden age. At the same time, creating an almost perfect storm, a third movement was in the wind, one which, even if not intending to do so, undercut the privileged place of Thomism, especially in seminaries. Aidan Nichols comments on this new emphasis that emerged: theology itself should be preachable; that is, it should be readily and immediately able to be "translated" into a Sunday homily relevant to contemporary situations. In achieving this purpose Aquinas was held to be no help; he was insufficiently biblical, excessively philosophical and too complicated. Some blame for the hasty exit of St Thomas from the Academy should also be placed on what Nichols calls "the off-putting mode of the pedagogical and literary presentation in which Thomism was often cast.... [I]ts communication in many seminaries and Catholic philosophy faculties appears to have become dessicated and ahistorical". Pius xi's admonition to "go to Thomas" was insufficiently observed. A dry summary of certain theses replaced the texts of the Master himself.

Despite this evident decline in the study of Aquinas, in 1974, Paul VI rather surprisingly expressed his delight in what he optimistically called "the extraordinary, even if unforeseen, "return' of St Thomas, which has confirmed the wisdom of the supreme Magisterium in declaring him to be the authoritative, irreplaceable guide in philosophy and theology". For his part, John Paul II hoped that the Council's encouragement, together his own particular blend of Thomism and phenomenology, would give a new impetus to the Church's intellectual apostolate. To be sure, John Paul did not propose that Thomism was the Church's only philosophy, as had Leo xiii, who had affirmed that "insistence upon the thought of the Angelic Doctor" is "the best way to recover the practice of a philosophy consonant with faith". Rather, John Paul allows for a plurality of philosophical systems, with the caveat that to be acceptable they must share Aquinas' metaphysical realism, including his position on the natural knowability of the existence of God. Certainly Thomas is a "model" for the philosopher. Nevertheless, the Pope adds, despite the high praise owed to Thomas, "the Church has no philosophy of her own nor does she canonize any one particular philosophy in preference to others".

As for theology, John Paul lauds St Thomas as "a model of the right way to do theology", adding that "the Magisterium has repeatedly acclaimed the merits of Saint Thomas' thought and made him the guide and model for theological studies".

Doctor Veritatis: Relativism and the Crisis of Truth

Much can be said about the intellectual malaise, the so-called "weak thought" of our contemporaries. Probably there is no single cause for the corruption of the modern mind. But I would submit that a good place to begin finding a cause is the penetrating analysis of Pope Benedict.

According to the Holy Father, among the major challenges to the Church of the 21st century, and one which presents "a particularly insidious obstacle in the task of educating", is the massive presence of relativism in society and in the halls of the Academy. The central problem of our system higher education is not its failure to provide strong intellectual and marketable skills, which it can do well enough, but its premise that reality does not exist independently of the human mind and cannot be known with any certainty. In this way, even if not intentionally, far too many colleges and universities stifle the students' natural desire to know, and to know the truth. This entices them to avoid the humanities and liberal arts and take refuge in the professional and practical arts alone, with their expected financial rewards.

Another consequence of this underlying assumption and one even more serious is that, even if a person practices his or her faith, such faith has nothing to do with truth; hence, nothing to do with the core purpose of a university; that is, teaching and research. In situations where what makes a university "Catholic" is not the content of what is taught in other words, the curriculum - but only the laudable concern for the "whole student", then its intellectual foundation has been weakened, perhaps beyond repair. Important as student life is to expressing one's faith, it can never replace the curriculum as the principal locus of genuine catholicity in the world of higher education.

All too often relativism and privatized faith are not only the academic's creed, but also that of the person on the street. Indeed, relativism has become a secular dogma and "it is considered dangerous and "authoritarian' to speak of truth". A "dictatorship of relativism" prevails in the now famous phrase from Cardinal Ratzinger's homily before he was elected Pope.

In fact, in many universities, seeking truth is considered a hopelessly impossible, even naive, undertaking. Academics are suspicious, if not hostile, to any claim to know the truth. They often suffer from "the widespread conviction that the possibility of attaining truth is an illusion of traditional metaphysics", accepting as true only what can be experienced.

In the university world skepticism reigns about truth: nothing is definitive except in the empirically verifiable scientific realm. If this University is going to fulfill its mission in the Church as a community of teachers and learners, its curriculum is going to have to meet this crisis of truth head-on. It can do so by arguing convincingly, with passion and respect, that the truth can be pursued and, to a limited but real extent, attained by the human mind and communicated to others. Such a service to the truth is the intellectual foundation of every Catholic university. Today we must reaffirm the "the "passion for truth" that animated St Thomas in order to harness the intellectual forces necessary for the development of a future of authentic human flourishing. Failure to engage this quest leads a scholarly community to see itself merely as an educational provider, trapped in a hall of mirrors of endless choices without focus or purpose. Consequently, as Ralph McInerny has noted in typical pithy fashion, "The main reason to read Thomas is to learn things that are true".

Catholic universities can imitate today what Aquinas did in the thirteenth century by imbuing their curricula with the desire to search freely "the whole truth about nature, man and God". Although his serene openness alarmed not a few of his contemporaries, he searched for truth diligently and lovingly among pre-Christian and non-Christian philosophers, willing to engage in intellectual dialogue with all wise teachers. Thomas showed great liberty of spirit and intellectual honest in dealing with new questions and by not rejecting secularist philosophies a priori and without examination.

Aquinas was ever alert to the truth buried in the opinion of others: "There is no false teaching which does not have some truth admixed in it", he affirmed. John Paul II observed that for Thomas "this presence of truth even if it be incomplete and imperfect and at times distorted is a bridge uniting every man to other men and makes understanding possible when there is good will".

Whence the source of the Saint's conviction? In his unrelenting search for the good and the true, Thomas recognized that the Holy Spirit was already at work, opening the human heart and making it ready to welcome the truth of the Gospel. In a celebrated phrase he states: "any truth, no matter by whom it is spoken, is from the Holy Spirit". The action of the Spirit creates an affinity for the truth and draws the human heart towards it; he helps human knowledge mature in wisdom and in trusting abandonment to what is true. Just as he succeeded in establishing a fruitful confrontation with the Arab and Hebrew thought of his time, treating them respectfully but refusing to let himself be overawed by their authority, so must scholars and students in a Catholic university, with a similar grace bequeathed by the Holy Spirit, be free to examine the truth wherever it may be found.

Pope Paul VI sums up this attitude of Thomas to all the great masters of human thought, an attitude which might well undergird every university which strives to preserve, hand on and enrich the Catholic intellectual, moral and artistic tradition. First, he began with great admiration for the intellectual patrimony of other traditions. Second, he recognized the value and significance but also the limitations of each thinker. Finally, he was compassionate towards those who, like the philosophers of antiquity, lacked the light of faith. The Holy Father then speculated on how Thomas would confront contemporary questions:

"We are convinced that were he among us today he would be no less eager to investigate the forces that are bringing about changes in man, his conditions, his manner of thinking and his way of life. Whatever would help him now to speak of God more worthily and persuasively than ever before would be in his eyes a cause for rejoicing. Yet in all this he would never lose that serene, magnanimous sense of security which faith alone can bestow on the human mind".

The Angelic Doctor is a marvelous example of Christian scholars open to the signs of the times shaping their age and yet remaining faithful to the path marked out by faith, tradition and the Church's teaching. What a lesson this is for civilized and respectful scholarly interchange in the Academy!

Doctor Concordiae: Harmony of Faith and Reason

Besides being, par excellence, the Doctor Veritatis, Thomas is also the Doctor Concordiae; that is, he is the pre-eminent teacher of the harmony between faith and reason, the "two wings on which the human spirit rises to the contemplation of truth".

In addressing the University community at Leuven in 1985, Pope John Paul II affirmed: "The whole living tradition of the Church teaches us this: faith seeks understanding, and understanding seeks faith. Both the need to understand and the need to believe are deeply rooted in man's heart. It is for this reason that the Church herself was the point of departure for the creation of universities". Nonetheless, a particular challenge faces universities today in that many would detach faith from reason, and reason from faith. This challenge can be met if teachers and learners take the Angelic Doctor as their master. "With his charism as a philosopher and theologian", says Pope Benedict, "he [Thomas] offered an effective model of harmony between reason and faith, dimensions of the human spirit that are completely fulfilled in the encounter and dialogue with one another".

For Aquinas, then, faith and reason should be neither separated nor placed in competition; rather, they go hand in hand. "Both the light of reason and the light of faith come from God, he [Thomas] argued; hence there can be no contradiction between them".

On the relationship St Thomas is truly enlightening. Commenting on this, Pope John Paul II has said:

"Philosophical and theological truth converge into a single truth. The truth of reason ascends from creatures to God; the truth of faith descends directly from God to man. But this diversity of method and origin does not detract from their fundamental unity, because there is a single identical Author of truth manifested through creation, and truth communicated personally to man by means of His Word. Philosophical research and theological research are two different directions of movement of a single truth, destined to meet, but not collide, on the same road, in order to help each other. Thus reason, illuminated, strengthened and guaranteed by faith, becomes a faithful companion of faith itself and faith immensely widens the limited horizon of human reason".

Pope Benedict reaffirms his predecessors' views that Aquinas offers "an effective model of harmony between reason and faith, dimensions of the human spirit that are completely fulfilled in the encounter and dialogue with one another". Indeed, "an intellectual "culture' which is genuinely Catholic", must be "confident in the profound harmony of faith and reason". The Holy Father affirms that "a natural friendship exists between faith and reason, founded in the order of Creation itself". The synergy between the two is the linchpin of Benedict's thought. At the origin of the Christian faith there is not only the Jerusalem of the theologians but also the Athens of the philosophers.

In dealing with the harmony between faith and reason developed so exquisitely by Aquinas, the Holy Father leaves no doubt about the Christological center of this vision. For Thomas, he writes, "the definitive fulfilment of every authentic human aspiration rests in Jesus Christ". But it was the genius of Aquinas to have highlighted the autonomy of philosophy, and with it the laws proper to reason. He gave a new emphasis to the specific responsibility of reason, which was not to be absorbed by faith. According to Thomas, Christianity was obliged to argue the case for its own reasonableness.

Drawing, then, on St Thomas, Pope Benedict is convinced that it is urgent for contemporary thinkers "to rediscover anew human rationality open to the light of the divine Logos and his perfect revelation which is Jesus Christ, Son of God made man". Nor does exhort only scholars. In countless homilies and discourses he cites St Peter's injunction to every Christian: "Always be ready to make your defense to anyone who demands from you an accounting for the hope that is in you" (1 Pet 3: 15). It is the Christian faith which safeguards reason in the modern world. Indeed, faith liberates reason from its own limitations. God has revealed himself as creative Reason and, precisely as the Logos, has acted and continues to act lovingly on our behalf. "In the beginning was the Word", the Logos, and "the Word became flesh" (Jn 1: 1, 14). The divine Logos is thus the origin of the universe, and this same Logos was united once and for all with humanity, the world and history, in Christ. Moreover, this Reason is not a mathematics of the universe nor a first cause that withdrew after producing the Big Bang. Rather, it has "a heart such as to be able to renounce its own immensity and take flesh".

The Holy Father addresses directly the consequence for higher education of holding to such an understanding of reason. In his first major address to academics he affirmed: "This then is the great challenge to Catholic universities: to impart knowledge in the perspective of true rationality, different from that of today which largely prevails, in accordance with a reason open to the question of the truth and to the great values inscribed in being itself, hence, open to the transcendent, to God".

Because God is Reason, our faith has something that has to do with reason; it can be passed on through it and has no cause to hide from it. Whenever faith in God separates itself from its rational foundation, such a faith is put at risk.

Without the light of faith, however, human reason cannot find sure and fulfilling answers to today's many urgent problems. Catholic universities, if they are to remain true to the intellectual tradition which has shaped them from their beginning, are called to bear witness not only to the dignity of human reason and its capacity for knowing reality but also to the role played by faith in learning. Our universities are broader, not narrower, in their outlook, since the study of divine revelation opens up a whole area of reality beyond the reach of reason left to its own natural resources. As Fr Victor Brezik once reminded us, "the combination of the world of revealed knowledge with the world of rational knowledge gives the Catholic university a much more challenging horizon of study".

The Mall without the Chapel would be incomplete; and the Chapel without the Mall would be in exile. What we are blessed to have at UST is an architectural embodiment of a sound Thomism. The Catholic sacramental imagination demanded the completion of the Academic Mall crowned by the Chapel and we are forever grateful to Dr Joe McFadden for that. Moreover, that the Chapel bespeak a certain prominence for faith is also necessary. When the study of the world guided by reason and faith is taken seriously, a certain hierarchy of importance emerges. That is why theology and philosophy have long been accorded a kind of primi inter pares status in the University's curriculum.

Furthermore, fidelity to Thomas also demands that a Catholic university teach theology as a divine science, and not religious studies, a human one dependent on rational inquiry alone. Even though the core beliefs of Christianity are revealed and held by faith, students have to be informed of what they are. Aquinas never suggests that explaining the content of the articles of faith will bring about a response of faith, but he does think that we need to be told them. Theology courses at a Catholic university propose sacra doctrina. They set out what Christ taught in the Gospels, since he "is the first and chief teacher of spiritual doctrine and faith". Consequently, a Catholic university should be a place in where special attention is given to ensuring that students learn from theologians who propose the teaching of Christ as historical and authoritative.

Authentic Christian faith does not fear reason "but seeks it out and has trust in it". Faith presupposes reason and perfects it. Nor does human reason lose anything by opening itself to the content of faith. When reason is illumined by faith, it "is set free from the fragility and limitations deriving from the disobedience of sin and finds the strength required to rise to the knowledge of the Triune God". The Holy Father observes that St Thomas thinks that human reason, as it were, "breathes" by moving within a vast horizon open to transcendence. If, instead, "a person reduces himself to thinking only of material objects or those that can be proven, he closes himself to the great questions about life, himself and God and is impoverished". Such a person has far too summarily divorced reason from faith, rendering asunder the very dynamic of the intellect.

What does this mean for Catholic universities today? Pope Benedict answers in this way: "The Catholic university is [therefore] a vast laboratory where, in accordance with the different disciplines, ever new areas of research are developed in a stimulating confrontation between faith and reason that aims to recover the harmonious synthesis achieved by Thomas Aquinas and other great Christian thinkers". When firmly grounded in St Thomas' understanding of faith and reason, Catholic institutions of higher learning can confidently face every new challenge on the horizon, since the truths discovered by any genuine science can never contradict the one Truth, who is God himself.

Is There Contradiction with 2 Samuel 24:1 and 1 Chron 21:1?

King David playing the harp

Anonymous said...

magandang araw po father

itatanongko lang po,bakit magkakontra ang 1 cro 21:1-... at 2 sam 24:1-... pakipaliwanag naman ang mga ibig sabihin,pls hihintayin kopo ang sagot n'yo,salamat po

April 5, 2010 5:48 PM

Fr. Abe, CRS said...

[magandang araw po father itatanongko lang po,bakit magkakontra ang 1 cro 21:1-... at 2 sam 24:1-... pakipaliwanag naman ang mga ibig sabihin,pls hihintayin kopo ang sagot n'yo,salamat po]

Dear Anonymous,

This is just a 'seeming' contradiction. The two textx were written years or decades apart from each other and for sure they were written by different Biblical writers. Even though the story that they want to present is similar or one and the same event the writers presented them with different perspective or theological viewpoint.

That of the Book of Samuel presented David's census of Israel as regards the king's relation with God... thus the divine command for the census. On the other hand, the Book of Chronicles presented it on the perspective of the inner weakness of David wherein he succumbed to the temptation of Satan.

The two could be reconciled. Look again in 2 Sam 24:1 God is already angry when He ordered the census.Why was the Lord God angry? Because David succumbed to the temptation of Satan. David wanted to census the people because he was lacking in faith and trust that the Lord can give him victory in battle even with very few soldiers. In fact in 2 Sam 24:10 King David categorically asked God's forgiveness for his sin. It means that the census was primarily motivated by David's sin which is an effect of Satan's temptations.

I hope I was able to clarify this one a little bit.

April 29, 2010 2:07 PM