MYTH DEBUNKED: THE CHURCH FUNDS UNDER ELI’S BANK ACCOUNT, YULI, HAMMILAN AND OTHER ACCUSATIONS!

Bro Eli admitted in one of his bible expo that church funds are not under his own management but online, people were provoking malicious minds by showing apparently proofs of church funds under his own bank accounts!⚠

OK!

May I ask, if this is true, would you not trust your leader to manage church funds, for you to entrust him the church treasury, if ever you’re the true church?

Just saying!

Here are some of those allegations:

I was among the crowd in Apalit when Bro Eli beseeched the charitable hearts of the people to “ease him of his burden” by asking us, implying the capable and willing, to contribute a specific amount to account for the millions of pesos needed. Saying that if 20 or 100, whichever, I forgot, would give 1000 each, if I remember the amount correctly, we could produce the necessary amount.

It was not compulsory. It was to whomever was capable and willing.

Nothing wrong with that. It is by the givers discretion if he would give or not, but if he chose to give, it must not be bec he was forced but by a willing mind.

And if ever sis luz, asked funds for the church’s welfare, I believe she never said or suggested that every member would give 1000 each. I believe its just mere black propaganda.

Now, I asked this:

would you not trust your leader to manage church funds, for you to entrust him the church treasury, if ever you’re the true church?



Paul managed the church’s treasury. What’s wrong if church funds would be placed in eli’s bank account as the treasury was in the hands of Paul and some others?!

2 Corinthians 8:14,20

[14]But by an equality, that now at this time your abundance may be a supply for their want, that their abundance also may be a supply for your want: that there may be equality:

[20]Avoiding this, that no man should blame us in this abundance which is administered by us:

And what’s wrong with asking for members to give 1000 each with the condition that it is by a willing mind as Paul urged macedonians to help the others, not purposed as burdensome, but by a willing mind.

2 Corinthians 8:8,10-14

[8]I speak not by commandment, but by occasion of the care of others, and to prove the sincerity of your love.

[10]And herein I give my advice: for this is expedient for you, who have begun before, not only to do, but also to be caring a year ago.

[11]Now therefore perform the doing of it; that as there was a readiness to will, so there may be a performance also out of that which ye have.

[12]For if there be first a willing mind, it is accepted according to that a man hath, and not according to that he hath not.

[13]For I mean not that other men be eased, and ye burdened:

[14]But by an equality, that now at this time your abundance may be a supply for their want, that their abundance also may be a supply for your want: that there may be equality:

So?!

Is the church wrong when it imposed an amount as a request, not compulsory, that whoever has a willing mind, if he purposed in his heart to give that amount should give?!

For if there be first a willing mind, it is accepted according to that a man hath, and not according to that he hath not.

ON MATTERS OF ONLINE DEFAMATION AGAINST ELI🔻
I don’t claim to be the right person authorized to speak in behalf of the church but as a concerned member, I would defend him the best possible way I could.

Let’s see…

That is church internal matters, the lot was Eli’s personal property post-donated to the church, that after he died accdg to an agreement as documented, would be church’s property. 

Is it under his name??

So what??

So what if all of church’s property would be in his name as owner? 

If you are the true church, would you not entrust anything to your leader knowing that it is the will of god that is working in the church?!

We submit to our leader in matters where it don’t contradict scriptures. Requesting for a fixed amount as willing contribution does not contradict doctrine. We must submit to it, but in the essence of wilfully and not coerced giving!

NOW TELL US, WHERE DO WE CONTRADICT SCRIPTURES?!

Moreover,

Ok!

I’m not privy of these allegedly misdeeds like a cave man, but if ever these are true, 

WHAT’S WRONG WITH IT?!

DOES IT CONTRADICTS SCRIPTURE?!

The answer is NO!

 As wrong deed is only imputed where intention was unseemly and unchristian, if it was intended for personal gain!

 DO YOU SEE INTENT TO ACCUSE HIM OF WRONG?! DO YOU SEE THAT HE INTENDED IT FOR PERSONAL GAIN?

These money-making endeavors was obviously fair, it was not compulsory! It was to whom who were willing!

For if there be first a willing mind, it is accepted according to that a man hath, and not according to that he hath not.

It was not intended for personal gain! He was investing on businesses and other money-producing schemes, so to increase financial gain, intended for the church and charitable works for the needy now and in the future.

What if these are his personal investments and businesses if he is making it grow intended for the church after his death?!

HE MEANT TO DONATE IT TO THE CHURCH!

He promised that nothing would go to his families but intended for the church.

So why is he accumulating money and increasing financial resources?!

FOR THE CHURCH NOW AND IN THE FUTURE WHEN HE DIE!

Never did he intend it for personal gain!

So what scripture did he contradicts?

Moreover,

I have to answer these one by one.

  • Gugulan, a woman, led the church.

    Obviously, it is prohibitted for women to lead. But did it say, a woman cannot lead in times when no man has the capacity to lead?

    Was the woman usurping the authority of man?

    No! Bec there was no man fit for the authority! Therefore, was she usurping anything from any man, when there was no man, she would usurp authority from!?

    Like, Deborah, she assumed another man’s rule even if the leadership was meant for Barak, bec there was no leadership assumed by Barak.

    • Soriano expelled bec of rebellion contrary to Nicholas Perez doctrines

    Even now, Soriano recognizes Perez as his predecessor, thus he did never intend to rebel against true doctrines. It was Gugulan who became wayward by usurping the authority of man when during those times, there is already a man meant to lead, yet Gugulan out of her delusion declined to step down therefore it was Gugulan who became rebellious. Eli did not separates from Perez. He led the sound minded flock out from corruption, thereby preserving the church in line with the true church’s integrity as once led by Perez.

    • Bouncing check?! Bro Eli issued bouncing check?!

    Vague memory. I could remember Bro Eli, explaining the flaws of bouncing check law. It needs consideration, bouncing checks happens when funds, where depleted in various many reasons. Some were unintentional but by necessity resulting to bouncing checks. The supreme court though don’t say its immoral.

    • Bro Eli having joint account with another man.

    As I said, Bro Eli promised that nothing of his assets would go to his family but to the church. Why would he share his bank account with someone without any rational reason?

    A lover?

    As far as reality is concerned, nothing is confirmatory to at least say, there is truth to it, to validate INC’s malicious jump to conclusion. 

    Everything is hypothetical.

    My principle in life is: incomplete evidence is not evidence at all, thus you cannot be as convincing as hell.

    Now, other possibility of the alleged joint account:

    • Business or investment partnership
    • Charity work’s financial management
    • Yuli as appointed financial disbursement manager
    • Others i.e who knows?! Do you!?

    As you can see, everything are mere possibilities! Ver Santiago as accuser as witness of an illicit affair?!

    Someone commented:

    As you can see, the commenter obviously lacks tremendous logical thinking. He believes Ver was truthful. Its stupid. Truth needs evidence. A claim is just a claim. Without evidence, it is dismissable in court. Therefore, Eli having a lover is yet a theory.

    Evolution is a theory, do you believe it?

    • Bro Eli, as nuisance candidate for senator, in contrary to his words that preachers must not indulge in politics.

    His words were ambiguous actually. It could be explained in many ways. How sure are you that you interpreted it the way he intended?

    • Boasted of having a temple but saying temples are worthless in our time.

    Worthless temples are temples as obligatory worship buildings for the church. ADD CONVENTION CENTER is by literalism, a temple, but the necessity of temples, as a customary worship building for the church every place is impractical. We have one temple, and its not worthless, if indeed you quoted him properly, so he logically, meant temples are worthless if it is other than necessary.

    I did not research it if these accusations were correctly quoted. I’m answering at face value. Just simple logic. You did not present a rather credible source. Its either that you’re lying or not. If you want, a profitable interaction, i promise i would debunk you with anything you have against us, just give me solid proof so i would take you seriously. Ill pour out sweat and blood to research it. Here’s my email: butzdenn@gmail.com

    • Offered $20,000 for expelled INC members to be part of the church

    I believe it was in the context of snatching those destined to hell. Its a way of putting them where light is, with the possibility of seeing the light, then, salvation, but necessarily, through this bait–a lucrative monetary offer!

    Jude 1:21-23

    [21]Keep yourselves in the love of God, looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life.

    [22]And of some have compassion, making a difference:

    [23]And others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire; hating even the garment spotted by the flesh.

    Its like Paul using bait for others to be saved. He used his own money for helping the church, that as a bait to catch them. By it, as influence!

    2 Corinthians 12:14-16

    [14]Behold, the third time I am ready to come to you; and I will not be burdensome to you: for I seek not yours, but you: for the children ought not to lay up for the parents, but the parents for the children.

    [15]And I will very gladly spend and be spent for you; though the more abundantly I love you, the less I be loved.

    [16]But be it so, I did not burden you: nevertheless, being crafty, I caught you with bait.

    • Sacred pulpit for Honasan’s political campaign?

    What’s wrong with it?

    God sanctioned politics, as a way to build a government, laws, penalties. If not how could god sanctioned government, its laws and penalties without politics?

    1 Peter 2:13-14

    [13]Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme;

    [14]Or unto governors, as unto them that are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers, and for the praise of them that do well.

    Now that politics is allowed, is campaign not pursuant of god’s will for an established govt? Therefore, campaign is a good thing. Its for a good purpose-god’s purpose. If we let campaign in our midst, is it not a good thing as it is pursuant to the will of God–to establish govt?!

    • Habitual demeaning and shaming members bec of contribution shortcomings?

    Not true. With my almost a year attendance, I never witnessed any. I only witnessed when he humiliated a sister bec of improper dressing. But your accusation, is simply nil.

    • Unfulfilled promise: construction of an expensive house of worship.

    No big deal. God never promised an infallible leaders if indeed he failed. Besides, everything must be taken in context.Are you sure you interpreted him correctly?

    An example:

    Jesus said he won’t go to the feast but he went secretly.

    Logic:: jesus logically meant not to go openly, but never said he won’t go secretly bec he secretly went.

    Bro Eli’s words were ambiguous, so why do you attempt to interpret what he means, by assuming what it means?

    Bro Eli allegedly promised a house of worship but what does he mean?

    What he possibly mean for me was:

    A house of worship would be constructed provided plans would be unhindered or if there are no change of plans.

    CRITICS, GIVE ME UNAMBIGUOUS STATEMENTS OF BRO ELI THAT CERTIFY ERRORS, FALSEHOOD OR CONTRADICTIONS!

    • Owning luxury cars and having 5000 pairs of shoes as gift from members.

      Mike Enriquez, Gma-7, interviewed him regarding luxury cars and Eli’s answer if I could remember right was:

      “Isang jeep (sarao) lang yata ang nakarehistro…sa pangalan ko!”

      People have been too illogical to interpret it as denial of having luxury cars in his name and as a claim of having one jeep only.

      Stupid people do that!

      He never denied or confirmed of having luxury cars registered in his name. He was not even sure if his jeep is registered or not by saying “yata“. Meaning, he was not privy of which things alleged of him were registered in his name bec he wasnt sure if his jeep was registered in his name, claiming the possibility of the only one registered in his name so how come he owned luxury cars?

      Logic!

      Regarding 5000pairs of shoes as gifts from members, what would he do with it?

      You dont know of course. But receiving gifts, from members simply cannot be prevented. You cannot prevent expression of love. 

      I cannot see anything wrong.

      • MTRCB suspended bro Eli’s tv program bec of ethics problem

      MTRCB based decision from man-made laws. Bro Eli based his from the bible. 

      Between bible and man-made ethics?

      We prefer the bible!

      • Libel cases, rape case, frustrated murder case against Eli?

      Jesus was an accused likewise. Unless, there is no court decision, there is no legal basis for condemning Eli. Even if a guilty verdict is there, in the end, only god could make the credible verdict.

      Lastly, let me address an impulsive critic, he said:

      Palpak na pangangasiwa? Or god’s way?

      Read:

      Everything that the church do in the church is by god’s divine influence and guidance. What happened to Bert Miranda and Marianito Cayao was god’s way of testing who are true faithful children.

      1 Corinthians 3:13-15

      [13]Every man’s (preacher) work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire (tests); and the fire shall try every man’s work of what sort it is.

      [14]If any man’s work (christians) abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.

      [15]If any man’s work (christians) shall be burned, he (preacher) shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.

      Miranda and Cayao were burned by fire (tests) thus manifested as unfit to be in the church.

      They are not one of us as revealed by fire.

      1 John 2:19

      [19]They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.

      As you can see, my work is poorly researched, what I did was destroying yours by logical means, as you see, easy as yours were careless and logical fallacy wherein you jump to conclusion having insufficient facts and sometimes, out of context, and most often, hearsay, such as how Luchi Cruz Valdez used in her Special Assignment Tv program demeaning bro eli.

      She was trying to pin bro eli by her bias reporting, pre-judged sentiments and ludicrous sarcasm such as comparing bro eli to an alleged plunderer jose pidal….its all one-sided reporting, irresponsible journalism, calling ADD CONVENTION as eli’s kaharian, and eli as king with the tone of derision as evident throughout her presentaion, and calling our group as sanga sangang daan, it was pure malice. 

      Bro eli never acted by constraint or as lord or hari, ms luchi Cruz. Your Bronx is showing, as the saying goes.

      1 Peter 5:2-3

      [2]Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight thereof, not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind;

      [3]Neither as being lords over God’s heritage, but being ensamples to the flock.

      OUT OF CONTEXT, BIAS, ONE-SIDED!

      You interviewed displeased apostates and never the faithful close to eli. It should have been credible, if those in eli’s inner circle clash testimonies with disgruntled apostates.

      You should have made it, the words of the faithful versus apostates.

      OUT OF CONTEXT, ONE SIDED!

      That is the core of his report. Nothing as valid as a credible reality. Her witnesses words against bro eli. They were misguided fools trying to accuse bro eli of contradictory and revisionist doctrines, which luchi Cruz exploited to call us sanga sangang daan, having no validation of any such revision but simply basing on low-intellect  analysts  wannabe as Bert Miranda.
      Porn komiks through rich ex-members and workers disgruntled of eli’s administration??

      • Really?? Your words against eli. There were many witnesses against jesus likewise. The fact that no tangible evidence of any illicit affair was ever produced. Its just mere words, and suspicion like David and jonathan is accused of muslims as lovers. Its just, theories! Nothing proven! It could be true. It could not be.
      • For me, i dont believe anything of those! I have proof!
      • What proof??
      • WE ARE THE TRUE CHURCH! Thus it follows, the leader is godly. God promised that mortal sin/gates of hell would not dominate us, by way, of being led by evil sodomizer. Evil people cannot rule over us as the glory for god is perpetually present.
      • Ephesians 3:21
      • [21]Unto him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus throughout all ages, world without end. Amen.
      • For that to be true, that the glory for god is in mcgi, making our leader godly, I have then to prove that we are the true church!
      • This is my proof▶ Click here!
      • Having credible proof, go ahead and check, which therefore between these two, Luchi Cruz witnesses and eli soriano is telling the truth now?

        HAMILAN AND SORIANO ON SENSUAL AND NAKED KISSING CONTACT???

        • LIAR! Its your words against him! False witness! 
        • I have proof!
        • Bro eli is the leader of the true church thus he is righteous!
        • WE ARE THE TRUE CHURCH! Thus it follows, the leader is godly. God promised that mortal sin/gates of hell would not dominate us, by way, of being led by evil sodomizer. Evil people cannot rule over us as the glory for god is perpetually present.
        • Ephesians 3:21
        • [21]Unto him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus throughout all ages, world without end. Amen.
        • For that to be true, that the glory of god is in mcgi, making our leader godly, I have to prove that we are the true church!
        • This is my proof▶ Click here!
        • Having credible proof, go ahead and check, which therefore between these two, Luchi Cruz witnesses vs eli soriano is credible?

        Undressing of soriano by male companion leaving him with underrshirt and shorts is lewd???

        • Luchi you included that? I undress my father leaving him with brief is lewd???
        • GRAVEH!? Pati yan? That’s a normal thing! hahaha
        • Men do it. 
        • Basketball players with short and sando is therefore lewd???
        • Maybe, male friends half naked and wearing shorts in a stiffling room is lewd acts too?

        Ver Santiago’s input as credible witness???

        • Not a valid witness. He was clearly an adulterer. A kick-out. Besides he  was just mere empty words. It is apparently revenge!

        A girl forced to manual labor-mixing cement??

        • Accusations like these must be looked at beyond face value. There are circumstances that must first be established.
        •  Was she forced, directly or indirectly??
        • Why did she not complain??
        • Who ordered her? Bro eli??
        • If there were lapses in anything through inconsiderate implemented rules, should we see it as church sanctioned or individual blunder?? Or lopsided discretion of the officer in charge??
        • Whose fault was it?
        • It cannot be the church.

        Bert miranda or was it ver santiago’s daughter disallowed to see her family?

      • Yes! According to you, but who knows if its true and what surrounding circumstances if so that its true? 
      • Discouraging students not to enroll in private schools, but rather giving of contributions instead bec the end is just near??

        DID BRO ELI FORCE YOU?!

        If so, then youre the only case. Or you took it out of context. We are told to submit to church leaders, but sometimes, others were being impulsive to take everything as an compulsory order. When it should be that, when it is not an imposition, dont take it as compulsory. It could be a practical suggestion like urine therapy. Bro eli did not impose that, it was only a suggestion–urine therapy!

        So, was it an imposition?!

        I doubt it. You assumed things and making your own urban legends!

        And thereby, acted upon. You failed the test of fire.

        Eli teaching unacceptable doctrine as god having butt bec man as his image has butt?

      • Come again?? You self-interpreted something and you think your level of understanding is at the proper level to think bro eli is wrong?
      • A kid like you trying calculus and seeing abstract, thought calculus is wrong??
      • Your mind is not yet at the level of understanding.
      • Let me give my piece…
      • God said, he that has an ear can he not hear? Referring to himself.
      • As you can see, god has a literal ear for hearing. Though its not physical but his ear functions literally for hearing. Thus, implying, god has body parts, literal body parts. As confirmed in Phil 2:6 God has a shape, and bec he sits, that part that sits as defined by dictionaries is the butt. 
      • Now, consider this, if we are the image of god in terms of body parts and its function as butt for sitting, ear for hearing, does it suggest we are fully in likeness of his body parts? We have penis and vagina, is god hermaphrodite?
      • No. It did not say. But we know that all of god’s body parts as mentioned in the bible were likewise seen in us thus we are his image in that sense that we possess a likeness to what is revealed as his body parts.
      • We cannot assume though that image of god means to be completely like him.
      • It did not say, we are his complete image bec fact is, god don’t have penis and vagina bec he has no partner. 
      • Therefore, in terms of body parts and its function, we are partially the image of god!

      • PARTIALLY!
      • I don’t claim I’m right. This is just my interpretation. But then, as you see, there is explanation. If i can do it, you think eli has no excplanation?
      • The problem is, youre just a kid trying on calculus. You’re not a lawyer and you think you can interpret the law? Or assumed the truth how it should be?!
      • Bro eli prohibits you to marry?

      • Yes! I was a novice then when I heard of that. Year 2000. But what was circulating then was, you cannot marry unless you have sufficient income. And that is biblical. Most, i think, were having different perspectives wherein it branches as urban legends. The right person to answer these is bro eli. Dont be accustomed to jumping to conclusion. Evidence first,certain and conclusive.
      • DONT IMMITATE LUCHI CRUZ VALDES WHO WAS BIAS BEC OF POSSIBLE IMPULSE AND DELUSIVE SELF-RIGHTEOUSNESS OR EMOTIONS! OR A PAID EMPTY SHELL! SUPOT!
      • AND ALL OF THESE UNANYMOUSLY ARE CREDIBLE WITNESSES?

        Give me a break! They failed the test of fire.

        Bro Eli having an evil administration, though there is no credible substance confirming it? Or everything he do is god’s way?

        Read:

        Everything that the church do in the church is by god’s divine influence and guidance. What happened to Bert Miranda and Marianito Cayao and other apostates was god’s way of testing who are true faithful children.

        1 Corinthians 3:13-15

        [13]Every man’s (preacher) work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire (tests); and the fire shall try every man’s work of what sort it is.

        [14]If any man’s work (christians) abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.

        [15]If any man’s work (christians) shall be burned, he (preacher) shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.



        Miranda and Cayao and apostates were burned by fire (tests) thus manifested as unfit to be in the church.

        They are not one of us as revealed by fire.

        1 John 2:19

        [19]They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.

        The mere fact that we are the true church as ive proven through a link, above, collaborate the reality that the church activities as authorized by bro eli has divine sanction! If you cannot take it just like these apostates, it is bec you are not one of us!

        In short, GOD TESTED YOU AND YOU FAILED.

        If you want to debate me, youre welcome in my facebook wall– find it in the INFORMATION BOARD in the menu above.

        And Luchi Cruz, don’t be too conceited to even be our judge, when you don’t know a single complete moral code in the bible, like using, TANGA, GAGO, ETC…as ethical and godly.

        NOW LUCHI-CRUZ, TELL US WHERE WE ARE WRONG!?

        Sus appu!

        Advertisements

        14 thoughts on “MYTH DEBUNKED: THE CHURCH FUNDS UNDER ELI’S BANK ACCOUNT, YULI, HAMMILAN AND OTHER ACCUSATIONS!

        Leave a Reply

        Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

        WordPress.com Logo

        You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

        Twitter picture

        You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

        Facebook photo

        You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

        Google+ photo

        You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

        Connecting to %s