-
It's funny that these blog refutes the so called errors of the Jehovah's
witness. JW is the only true religion. The so called Catholic 'aka'
Whore of Babylon is the filthiest abominable religion that deviated from
the true Christianity.
In 2002, allegations of priests sexually abusing children were widely reported in the news media. It became clear that the officials of various Catholic dioceses were aware of some of the abusive priests, and shuffled them from parish to parish (sometimes after psychotherapy), in some cases without removing them from contact with children. A survey of the 10 largest U.S. dioceses found 234 priests from a total 25,616 in those dioceses, have had allegations of sexual abuse made against them in the last 50 years. Some of these reassignments were egregious, the worst leading to the resignation of Cardinal Bernard Law from the Boston archdiocese. Victims of such abuse filed lawsuits against a number of dioceses, resulting in multi-million dollar settlements in some cases.
-
Fr. Abe, CRS said...
-
[It's funny that these blog refutes the so called errors of the Jehovah's witness. JW is the only true religion.]
THE SAKSI NI BAHO TRUE RELIGION? HA HA HA... YOU ARE GETTING DELUSIONAL. WHERE IN THE BIBLE CAN YOU READ THAT THE TRUE CHURCH IS FOUNDED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA WHERE PROSTITUTION, PORNOGRAPHY, DIVORCE, ABORTIONS, CONTRACEPTION, SAME-SEX MARRIAGE ARE LEGAL? WHERE? CHAPTER AND VERSE PLEASE. HA HA HA...
WHERE CAN YOU FIND IN THE BIBLE THAT THE TRUE CHURCH IS FOUNDED BY AN ANIMAL CALLED CHARLES TAZE RUSSEL? WHERE? CHAPTER AND VERSE PLEASE.
[ The so called Catholic 'aka' Whore of Babylon is the filthiest abominable religion that deviated from the true Christianity.]
HA HA HA... WHERE CAN YOU FIND IN THE BIBLE THAT THE WHORE OF BABYLON IS THE CATHOLIC CHURCH? WHERE? CHAPTER AND VERSE PLEASE. HA HA HA...
IN FACT THAT WHORE OF BABYLON IS MORE FITTING FOR YOUR COUNTRY OF ORIGIN THE SOURCE OF ALL IMMORALITIES AND INDECENCY IN THE WORLD.
YOUR SAKSI NI BAHO FOUNDER CHARLES TAZE RUSSEL IS MENTALLY CRUEL. HA HA HA... HIS OWN WIFE TOLD SO RIGHT IN COURT:
"In June 1903, Mrs. Russell filed a suit for legal separation in the Court of Common Pleas at Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. In 1906, she filed for divorce under the claim of mental cruelty[22] and was granted a divorce from bed and board, with alimony, in 1908." [Wikipedia]
-
[In 2002, allegations of priests sexually abusing children were widely
reported in the news media. It became clear that the officials of
various Catholic dioceses were aware of some of the abusive priests, and
shuffled them from parish to parish (sometimes after psychotherapy), in
some cases without removing them from contact with children. A survey
of the 10 largest U.S. dioceses found 234 priests from a total 25,616 in
those dioceses, have had allegations of sexual abuse made against them
in the last 50 years. Some of these reassignments were egregious, the
worst leading to the resignation of Cardinal Bernard Law from the Boston
archdiocese. Victims of such abuse filed lawsuits against a number of
dioceses, resulting in multi-million dollar settlements in some cases.]
OUR ABUSER PRIESTS WERE IMPRISONED AND PUNISHED. OUR DIOCESES PAYED DAMAGES TO THE VICTIMS DESPITE THE FACT THAT THOSE WHO COMMITTED THE CRIME DID SO AGAINST OUR TEACHINGS AND RULES. BUT, I'M GLAD THAT YOU BROUGHT THAT OUT. BECAUSE IT ONLY PROVES HOW HYPOCRITE YOU ARE.
IN YOUR JW-SAKSI NI BAHO, FROM THE FOUNDER TO THE MINISTERS ARE ROTTEN. YOUR SO-CALLED PURE RELIGION IS ROTTEN TO THE CORE. READ THIS:
Jehovah's Witnesses and child sex abuse
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
HA HA HA... SEE. YOU HAVE YOUR SKELETONS IN THE CLOSETS. HA HA HA... SPEAKING OF THE PURE RELIGION.... YOUR CLAIM IS 'PURE HEARSAY' LIKE A PROSTITUTE CLAIMING TO BE A VIRGIN.
THE WIKIPEDIA CONTINUES...
[As with other religious organisations, Jehovah's Witnesses have been obliged in recent years to develop child protection policies to deal with cases of child abuse in their congregations.]
SO, YOU TOO HAVE THE SAME PROBLEMS OF CHILD ABUSE CASES IN YOUR CONGREGATIONS. AND YOU ALSO HAVE BEEN OBLIGED TO DEVELOP CHILD PROTECTION POLICIES. HE HE HE... YOU SEE HOW HYPOCRITE YOU ARE.
LET US READ SOME MORE:
Cover-up allegations
Critics claim that in numerous cases, members of Jehovah's Witnesses have been prevented from reporting child molestation to civil authorities.[43][44]
O HO HO HO... HA HA HA... YOU ARE POSSESSED BY THE SAME DEMON THAT YOU ARE CRITICIZING. HA HA HA... YOU PRETEND TO BE ANGRY AT CHILD MOLESTATIONS BY PRIESTS YET THEY ARE ALSO DONE BY YOUR JW 'ELDERS'. HA HA HA...
Doctrinally, Jehovah's Witnesses handle all matters internally, which in recent years prompted accusations and lawsuits of a systematic sex offender cover-up.
AH... THERE IS A SYSTEMATIC AND GRAND SCALE COVER UP IN JEHOVAH WITNESSES... SO THESE SAKSI NI BAHO ARE NO BETTER THAN THOSE THEY ARE CRITICIZING. HA HA HA...
-
TO CONTINUE IN THE WIKIPEDIA:
Particularly since around 2000, the Jehovah's Witnesses organization has been accused of covering up cases of child molestation committed by their members. In February 2001, Christianity Today—an evangelical journal that disagrees with the theological perspective of Jehovah's Witnesses—printed an article reporting allegations that Jehovah's Witnesses' policies made reporting sexual abuse difficult for members, and did not conform to typical treatment of such cases. The article also included a response by representatives of Jehovah's Witnesses.[47]
AND SO YOU ARE DEFENDING YOUR COVER UPS. HA HA HA... NICE, NICE... HA HA HA... LET US READ FURTHER:
According to Witness spokesman J. R. Brown, Jehovah's Witnesses are not required to report crimes to elders before calling civil authorities. Victims and their families are free to call police at will, he said, although some don't choose to.[49] A circular sent to elders in the USA stated: "In those states where such is required, oftentimes the parent, the guardian, or the accused person himself can do the reporting. In this way the confidentiality protected by ecclesiastical privilege is not violated."[50] The Watchtower Society maintains its existing policy, without an explicit requirement for elders to report all child abuse cases where such is not mandatorily required by law.[43][44][51]
HA HA HA... SO AMONG THE JW - SAKSI NI BAHO THEY ARE NOT REPORTING THE CHILD ABUSES. IT DEPENDS ON THE VICTIMS OR THEIR PARENTS... THIS IS SATANIC. THEY SHOULD BE THE ONE TO REPORT TO THE AUTHORITIES. WHY DO THEY HAVE TO WAIT FOR THE VICTIMS TO DO SO?
IT IS ALSO REPORTED THAT THE JW - SAKSI NI BAHO ARE NEGOTIATING WITH VICTIMS IN OUT OF COURT SETTLEMENT AND THAT THEY PAID MILLIONS OF DOLLARS JUST TO COVER UP:
In 2007 during a ground-breaking trial motion in the Napa, California court against the Watchtower Society, victims' lawyers convinced the court that 'ecclesiastical privilege' does not supersede the legal obligation of clergy to report child sex abuse to secular authorities. The Watchtower Society paid an undisclosed amount (believed to be in the millions) in an out-of-court settlement with 16 unnamed victims of alleged sexual abuse within the religion.[54] According to court documents obtained by NBC News, one plaintiff was awarded over $780,000 USD.
AND MUCH MORE THE JW - SAKSI NI BAHO ELDERS REFUSED TO SPEAK UP AGAINST THE ABUSERS CLAIMING SECRECY:
Newspapers have reported that subpoenaed elders decline to testify against accused penitents, citing the confidentiality of penitent-clergy privilege.[56] However elders did not object to testifying once a specific matter of penitent-clergy privilege had been adjudicated.[57]
HA HA HA... LADIES AND GENTLEMEN LET US CLAP OUR HANDS TO THE PUREST RELIGION OF THEM ALL - THE ALL TIME PROSTITUTE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA WHICH IS THE NEW BABYLON: THE JEHOVAH WITNESSES!!! CLAP, CLAP, CLAP... HA HA HA... I HOPE YOU LIKED MY COMPLEMENT.
.jpg)
![ST. JEROME EMILIANI [1486-1537]](http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_6dKQTchkJaA/R0lo013dyBI/AAAAAAAAB_4/XzUAPDESwwQ/s1600/St.+Jerome+in+prayer,+small_1.jpg)
Father please help me i had a discussion with a jehova and i was proving that God and Jesus are one, i explained to him that in verses when jesus said that the father is greater than i that he was speaking in terms of his human standing compared to God and that dosent decrease the nature of jesus as God. then he cited john 8:27-30 where it said that jesus is teaching what the father has "TAUGHT HIM", he said that when he was not yet made man God taught God the Son, proving his point that jesus is lesser than God. how can i answer that. thanks father!
ReplyDeleteyan yun... yan yung TANGANG ANGHEL na sho-shonga shonga sa America kaya nasagasaan ng Tren! Si Charles Taze Russell!!
ReplyDeleteo mga Saksi ni JEHOLucifer yung founder nyo namatay sa KATANGAHAN!! Gusto nyong tumulad? hahahahahahahahahahahah BELAT!!!! :b
According to their F*cking publication AWAKE in 1950's edition: The BIBLE(The Word of God)Has 10,000 CONTRADICTIONS AND ERRORS!!
ReplyDeleteKAPAL NG MUKHA PARATANGAN ANG BIBLE NG ERROR AT CONTRADICTIONS TAPOS BIBLE DIN ANG GAGAMITIN NILA... CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! SAKSI NI CRAP!! HAHAHA
BELAT!!!! :b
[Father please help me i had a discussion with a jehova and i was proving that God and Jesus are one, i explained to him that in verses when jesus said that the father is greater than i that he was speaking in terms of his human standing compared to God and that dosent decrease the nature of jesus as God.
ReplyDeleteYOUR EXPLANATION IS CORRECT. JESUS IS INDEED EQUAL WITH THE FATHER BECAUSE THEY ARE ONE AS GOD. WORD FOR WORD JESUS IS CALLED GOD IN THE BIBLE. AND GOD THE FATHER HIMSELF DECLARED AS SUCH:
Heb 1:8 But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.
GOD THE FATHER DECLARED THE DIVINITY OF JESUS, THAT HE IS ABOVE THE ANGELS AND THAT HIS KINGSHIP AND KINGDOM IS FOREVER.
THAT STATEMENT OF JESUS IS AN ACT OF HUMILITY:
Philippians 2:5 Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:
Php 2:6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:
Php 2:7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:
Php 2:8 And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.
JESUS MADE HIMSELF LOW AND NOTHING. HE APPEARED ON EARTH AS A SON OF CARPENTER AND WAS SUBJECTED TO SIN AND DEATH NOT BECAUSE HE IS LESSER BUT AS A MANIFESTATION OF HIS GREAT HUMILITY AND SACRIFICE FOR THE SINS OF THE WORLD. AS ADAM AND EVE WANTED TO BE LIKE GOD [cf. GENESIS 3:5] SO JESUS COUNTERED IT BY GREAT HUMILITY. JESUS WAS TEACHING US HUMILITY THAT WE SHOULD HUMBLE BEFORE GOD.
then he cited john 8:27-30 where it said that jesus is teaching what the father has "TAUGHT HIM", he said that when he was not yet made man God taught God the Son, proving his point that jesus is lesser than God. how can i answer that. thanks father!
IT IS NOWHERE STATED IN JOHN 8:27-30 THAT JESUS IS LESSER THAN GOD THE FATHER. NO, NO, NO... NOTHING. WHERE IS THAT? CHAPTER AND VERSE PLEASE. HE HE HE...
ACTUALLY JESUS WAS SAYING THAT THE FATHER IS GREATER THAN HIM HE WAS SPEAKING IN HUMILITY. THAT VIRTUE HE LEARNED FROM THE FATHER AS STATED IN PHILIPPIANS 2:7-8. JESUS LEARNED HUMILITY FROM THE FATHER AND NOT THE INVENTED DOCTRINE OF CHARLES TAZE RUSSELL THE FAKE PROPHET WHO TAUGHT THAT JESUS IS LESSER THAN GOD THAN GOD THE FATHER.
AFTER JESUS MANIFESTED SUPREME HUMILITY ON THE CROSS ST. PAUL CONTINUED AND SAID THAT THE FATHER EXALTED JESUS ABOVE ALL:
Php 2:9 Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name:
Php 2:10 That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;
Php 2:11 And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
SEE, THE FATHER HIGHLY EXALTED HIM AND GAVE HIM THE NAME ABOVE EVERY OTHER NAME. WELL, THERE IS NO NAME GREATER THAN THE NAME OF GOD. THUS, HE IS EQUAL WITH GOD.
ANOTHER THING THAT PASSAGE THAT HE CITED DOES NOT SUPPORT HIS CLAIM BUT RATHER IT IS SUPPORTIVE OF OUR POSITION. LET US CHECK IT VERSE BY VERSE:
ReplyDeleteJoh 8:27 They understood not that he spake to them of the Father.
JESUS WAS TALKING ABOUT THE FATHER.
Joh 8:28 Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things.
JESUS SAID THAT WHEN HE IS LIFTED UP THEN THEY WILL REALIZE THAT 'I AM' HE. WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? IT REFERS TO THE DIVINITY OF JESUS. 'I AM' IS THE NAME OF GOD. IT IS WRITTEN IN GREEK BUT IT IS THE NAME OF GOD 'I AM'. JESUS HERE CLAIMS THAT WHEN HE IS RAISED ON THE CROSS THEN THE DISCIPLES WILL REALIZE THAT HE IS YHWH. HE IS GOD. THEN, JESUS ADDED THAT HE GOT IT FROM THE FATHER.
SO, WHAT JESUS LEARNED FROM THE FATHER BASED ON THIS PASSAGE IS NO OTHER THAN HE IS 'I AM'. HE IS YHWH. HE IS GOD. THIS IS SUPPORTED BY HEBREWS 1:8 AND JOHN 1:1.
Joh 8:29 And he that sent me is with me: the Father hath not left me alone; for I do always those things that please him.
SO, JESUS IS DOING THINGS TO PLEASE THE FATHER. SO WHEN JESUS SAID THAT HE IS 'I AM', THE IS YHWH THEN THAT IS PLEASING TO THE FATHER. HE SAID THAT THE FATHER IS ALWAYS WITH HIM. THAT IS IN REFERENCE TO JOHN 1:1 THAT FROM THE BEGINNING THE LOGOS WAS WITH GOD AND THE LOGOS IS GOD.
Joh 8:30 As he spake these words, many believed on him.
WE CATHOLICS BELIEVED JESUS LIKE THE APOSTLES. WE BELIEVED THAT JESUS IS GOD. HE IS 'I AM'. HE IS EQUAL IN BEING GOD WITH THE FATHER. HE IS YHWH. THE JW ARE NOT BELIEVING BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T COME FROM GOD. THEY ARE SAKSI NI BAHO! HA HA HA...
Ha!Ha! litaw na litaw ang kapaimbabawan at double standard ng mga yan Fr. Abe:
ReplyDeletehttp://silentlambs.com/ElderprotectPedophile.htm
'A prosecutor wants leaders of a Jehovah's Witnesses congregation to testify about what a Murrieta man accused of molesting two girls told them. So far, two of the elders who oversee the Windsong Valley Congregation in Wildomar say that defendant Gilbert Simental's statements are confidential and they do not want to testify.'
TALAGANG KAMPON NG DEMONIO. IMAGINE, AYAW MAGTESTIFY FOR THE TRUTH. HE HE HE...
ReplyDeletehi
ReplyDelete“Ako at ang Ama ay Iisa”
4 Ang mga relihiyon ay malimit na bumabanggit sa Juan 10:30 upang subuking suportahan ang Trinidad, bagama’t sa talatang iyan ay walang binabanggit na anumang ikatlong persona. Doon ay sinabi ni Jesus: “Ako at ang Ama ay iisa.” Subalit ang ibig bang sabihin ni Jesus ay na siya ang Diyos na Makapangyarihan-sa-lahat mismo, na nasa ibang anyo lamang? Hindi, hindi magkakagayon yamang sa tuwina’y sinasabi ni Jesus na siya ang Anak ng Diyos, at nakabababa sa Diyos at napasasakop sa Diyos. Kung gayon, ano ba ang ibig sabihin ni Jesus sa Juan 10:30?
5 Ang ibig sabihin ni Jesus ay na siya’y kaisa ng pag-iisip at ng layunin ng kaniyang Ama. Ito’y makikita sa Juan 17:21, 22 na kung saan si Jesus ay nanalangin sa Diyos na “silang lahat [ang kaniyang mga alagad] ay maging isa, gaya mo, Ama, na kaisa ko at ako’y kaisa mo, upang sila rin naman ay makaisa natin . . . upang sila’y maging isa, na gaya naman natin na iisa.” Si Jesus ba’y nananalangin noon na lahat sana ng kaniyang mga alagad ay maging isang persona? Hindi, siya’y nananalangin na sila sana’y magkaisa, magkaroon ng iisang pag-iisip at layunin, tulad ni Jesus at ng Diyos.
[hi]
ReplyDeleteHI DIN.
[“Ako at ang Ama ay Iisa”
4 Ang mga relihiyon ay malimit na bumabanggit sa Juan 10:30 upang subuking suportahan ang Trinidad, bagama’t sa talatang iyan ay walang binabanggit na anumang ikatlong persona.]
HA HA HA... MALALA NA PALA ANG ISIP NITO. BAKIT MO DIYAN SA JOHN 1O:30 HAHANAPIN ANG IKATLONG PERSONA E ANG AMA AT ANG ANAK LANG ANG BINABANGGIT DIYAN? PALPAK KA NAMAN. HINDI NAMAN NMIN GINAGAMIT ANG TALATANG IYAN PARA SA IKATLONG PERSONA KUNDI ITO:
Mateo 28:19 [Ang Biblia] "Dahil dito magsiyaon nga kayo, at gawin ninyong mga alagad ang lahat ng mga bansa, na sila'y inyong bautismuhan sa pangalan ng Ama at ng Anak at ng Espiritu Santo"
KITAM NA MAY TATLONG PERSONA ANG IISANG NGALAN NG DIOS: AMA, ANAK AT ESPIRITO SANTO.
PALPAK ANG PAGMIT MO NG TALATA PARA SA DOCTRINA NAMIN.
[Doon ay sinabi ni Jesus: “Ako at ang Ama ay iisa.” Subalit ang ibig bang sabihin ni Jesus ay na siya ang Diyos na Makapangyarihan-sa-lahat mismo, na nasa ibang anyo lamang? Hindi,]
ABA, ANG TAMPALASANG ITO. SAAN SINABI NI JESUS NA SIYA AY HINDI DIOS NA MAKAPANGYARIHAN SA LAHAT? PA HINDI-HINDI KA DIYAN E BUNGA LAMANG IYAN NG IYONG BALUKTOT NA PAGIISIP. WALA IYAN SA TALATA.
[ hindi magkakagayon yamang sa tuwina’y sinasabi ni Jesus na siya ang Anak ng Diyos,]
HA HA HA... YUN NA NGA E. SI JESUS AY ANAK NG DIOS HINDI AYON SA LAMAN KUNDI AYON SA ESPIRITO. ANG IBIG SABIHIN SIYA AY KATULAD NG AMA. KAYA NGA WORD FOR WORD NA TINATAWAG NA DIOS AT PANGINOON SI JESUS.
[at nakabababa sa Diyos at napasasakop sa Diyos.]
SAANG TALATA NAKASAAD NA SI JESUS AY NAKABABABA SA DIOS AT NAPAPASAKOP SA DIOS? NAGPAKA-BABA SI JESUS... THAT IS HUMILITY PERO HINDI SIYA LOWER THAN GOD. HINGGIL SA KAPANGYARIHAN NAMAN SINASABI NA IPAGKAKALOOB NG ANAK ANG LAHAT SA AMA SUBALIT SINABI RIN NA IPINAGKALOOB NG AMA SA ANAK ANG LAHAT NG KAPANGYARIHAN. KAYA PANTAY IYON. PAREHO NILANG INIAALAY ANG KADAKILAAN AT KAPANGYARIHAN SA ISAT-ISA.
[Kung gayon, ano ba ang ibig sabihin ni Jesus sa Juan 10:30?]
IISA SILA NG AMA. YUN YON, NO MORE NO LESS.
[5 Ang ibig sabihin ni Jesus ay na siya’y kaisa ng pag-iisip at ng layunin ng kaniyang Ama.]
AY HINDI. ANG MAGKAISA NG ISIP AT LAYUNIN AY HINDI MAGSASABI NA AKO AT ANG AMA AY IISA. MALI.
KUNG IISA LAMANG SILA SA PAG-IISIP AT LAYUNIN ANG SASABIHIN AY: "AKO AT ANG AMA AY NAGKAKAISA". MALAYO... ANG SABI: "AKO AT ANG AMA AY IISA." CLEAR NA CLEAR. BEING OR EXISTENCE ANG TINUTUKOY DIYAN... ESSENCE HINDI OPINION OR MENTALITY OR OBJECTIVE OR PURPOSE. PALPAK.
[ Ito’y makikita sa Juan 17:21, 22 na kung saan si Jesus ay nanalangin sa Diyos na “silang lahat [ang kaniyang mga alagad] ay maging isa, gaya mo, Ama, na kaisa ko at ako’y kaisa mo, upang sila rin naman ay makaisa natin . . . upang sila’y maging isa, na gaya naman natin na iisa.”]
HA HA HA... ANG PANALANGIN NA MAGKA-ISA ANG MGA DISIPULOS. ANONG WORD ANG GINAMIT: "KAISA KO AT KAISA MO"... IYAN ANG WORDS PARA SA LAYUNIN. SUBALIT SI CRISTO AT ANG AMA AY HINDI LANG NAGKAKAISA SA LAYUNIN NAGKAKAISA RIN IN EXISTENCE OR BEING: "GAYA NATIN NA IISA". TUTUONG ONE IN MIND AND HEART SI JESUS AT ANG AMA SUBALIT HINGGIT PA DUON ANG KANILANG UNITY. HINDI LANG SILA NAGKAKAISA KUNDI SILA AY IISA.
[Si Jesus ba’y nananalangin noon na lahat sana ng kaniyang mga alagad ay maging isang persona? Hindi, siya’y nananalangin na sila sana’y magkaisa, magkaroon ng iisang pag-iisip at layunin, tulad ni Jesus at ng Diyos.]
HINDI KAYA NGA ANG UNANG WORD NA GINAMIT AY "KAISA"... GUSTO NI JESUS NA SILA AY MAGKAISA. HARMONY AND PEACEFUL CO-EXISTENCE IYON. SUBALIT ANG AMA AT SI JESUS AY IISA. HINDI LANG SA PURPOSE OR OBJECTIVE IYON. THEY ARE TRULY ONE.