Sa Iglesia ni Manalo kain sila ng kain ng balut, di po ba? Ang isa sa sangkap ng balut e dugo na ayon sa mga apostol e bawal kainin.

Acts 21:25
[25]As touching the Gentiles which believe, we have written and concluded that they observe no such thing, save only that they keep themselves from things offered to idols, and from blood, and from strangled, and from fornication.

Iyang pagbabawal sa pagkain ng dugo e nauugat sa kautusan ni moses at ito ngayon ang ipinagdedepensa ng mga manalista na ika, pinapatulo ba yung dugo ng balut?

Ibinatay nila yan sa kautusan ni moses na bago kainin ang isang hayop e kakatayin muna at patutuluin ang dugo.

So ang tanong nila, pinapatulo ba ang dugo ng balut bago lutuin at kainin?

Leviticus 17:12-14
[12]Therefore I said unto the children of Israel, No soul of you shall eat blood, neither shall any stranger that sojourneth among you eat blood.
[13]And whatsoever man there be of the children of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among you, which hunteth and catcheth any beast or fowl that may be eaten; he shall even pour out the blood thereof, and cover it with dust.
[14]For it is the life of all flesh; the blood of it is for the life thereof: therefore I said unto the children of Israel, Ye shall eat the blood of no manner of flesh: for the life of all flesh is the blood thereof: whosoever eateth it shall be cut off.

Sabi pa nila, ang pinapatulo ang dugo e hinde yung sisiw ng balut kundi yung hayop o ibon na nahuhuli, meaning, buhay at gumagalaw, so hinde kasama balut dito. So pwede na daw kainin ang balut kasama dugo nito.

Isipin nyo po to: kahit patuluin mo ang dugo ng hayop me dugo pa ring naiiwan sa laman at itoy nakakain natin, meaning, yung dugo lang na pwedeng alisin ang bawal kainin.

Tanong: yung dugo ba ng balut e pwedeng alisin bago iluto? Pwede po, pero hinde na balut ito, so pwedeng alisin yung dugo nito, meaning, bawal itong kainin kasi pwede naman palang maalis, so bakit mo intentional kainin yung dugo e pwede palang maalis?

Logic po tayo mga kababayan.

Ang bawal kainin na dugo e yung pwedeng maalis na dugo. Ang dugo ng balut e naaalis po, so bawal kainin.

Pero tingnan nga natin yung pangangatwiran nila na ang bawal kainin na dugo e yung napatutulo lang?

Etong verse sa levitico e walang sinasabing yung bawal e yung napatutulo, kundi in specific terms na dugo perse, meaning, hinde lang yung napatutulo ang bawal kundi basta dugo.

Leviticus 7:26-27
[26]Moreover ye shall eat no manner of blood, whether it be of fowl or of beast, in any of your dwellings.
[27]Whatsoever soul it be that eateth any manner of blood, even that soul shall be cut off from his people.

Meaning, basta dugo e bawal kainin kasi hinde naman sinabi sa levitico 7:26-27 na pinapatulo ito, di ba? So pwede rin ang hinde pinapatulo tulad ng balut.



Iglesia ni Cristo whenever faced with the challenge: which is the true chuch would most likely quote Lamsa’s translation of Acts 20:28 which reads,

“The church of christ which he purchased with his own blood”

Its rather church of christ they say than church of god. Bec if it is church of god then its wrong. They then readily supplement it with a question: does god have blood? And often they solicit the supporting commentary of George Lamsa which reads:

“The Eastern text reads: “the Church Of Christ which he has purchased with his blood. Jewish Christians could not have used the term “God”, because in their eyes God is spirit, and spirit has no flesh and blood. It was Jesus of Nazareth who shed his blood on the cross for us, and not God.”[George M. Lamsa, New Testament Commentary, pp. 149 – 150]

Understanding the underlying reason to this conclusion would suggest it this way: “he purchased with his own blood” implies its precedent church of god as suggestive of ownership by which the owner god refers to the pronoun “he” who purchased the church with his own blood therefore brought out the idea of god having blood, but does god have blood?

Obviously, he has none therefore to have thought in this way, that god purchased the church by his blood is in a way erroneous therefore we cannot accept god as the purchaser. It could mean otherwise. Considering context, we have a clearer view how it should be explained:

Acts 20:18-19,21,28
[18]And when they were come to him, he said unto them, Ye know, from the first day that I came into Asia, after what manner I have been with you at all seasons,
[19]Serving the Lord with all humility of mind, and with many tears, and temptations, which befell me by the lying in wait of the Jews:
[21]Testifying both to the Jews, and also to the Greeks, repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ.
[28]Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he (the lord) hath purchased with his own blood.

As clearly illustrated, if we consider context, the lord jesus christ is the preceding subject in verse 19 and confirmed in verse 21 called as lord therefore to have said he hath purchased logically refers to the lord as preceding context, therefore the lord jesus purchased the church of god by his blood. It never indicated by any slight notion that god has blood. It was referring actually to what context said as lord. That as only referring to Jesus.

So to ask, does god have blood, is in disregard of context, and employing bias for one’s own faith, so to say that church of christ is the right translation for Acts 20:28 is now in jeopardy seeing that it lacks foundation of certainty.


I encountered some INC members that postulate the idea that logic cannot be used in biblical interpretation in as much that its an agent that is limited within human standards as they quoted:

1 Corinthians 2:4-5
[4]And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man’s wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power:
[5]That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God.

1 Corinthians 2:13
[13]Which things also we speak, not in the words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.

They reiterate on the prerequisite of human wisdom, yet is logic in biblical interpretation be that shallow to have its tenure on human wisdom?

Not a reality so, as logic could have been by divine intervention:

Philippians 2:12-13
[12]Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.
[13]For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.

Therefore it is not by private interpretation.

2 Peter 1:20
[20]Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

A christian who congregates in the church must have interpretation, that is, an inspired interpretation–by the holy ghost.

1 Corinthians 14:26
[26]How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying.

Such interpretation of biblical truth must be inherent of discernment–that as inclusive of logic.

Ecclesiastes 8:5-6
[5]Whoso keepeth the commandment shall feel no evil thing: and a wise man’s heart discerneth both time and judgment.
[6]Because to every purpose there is time and judgment, therefore the misery of man is great upon him.

It say, a wise man discern judgment. So if a church discerns that judgment must be that:

A. Members must watch TV

B. Bible must be 66 books

C. Lamsa’s “church of christ” is correct than kjv’s “church of god”

How shall he do it with the absence of logic when fact is, there is no direct biblical attestation in these regard?

It needs logic. So where is logic in the bible?

Hebrews 5:14
[14]But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern (Greek ‘diakrisis’: judicial estimation) both good and evil.

So discernment of good and evil is through judicial estimation, that as inevitable of one’s judgment we may as well call logical assessment.

That in so doing, in righteousness.

John 7:24
[24]Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.

That in matters of human life, all things done must be by faith.

Romans 14:22-23
[22]Hast thou faith? have it to thyself before God. Happy is he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth.
[23]And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin.

So if judicial estimation is not inclusive of logical assessment as partly, an agent of judgment then how do you prove to us by faith that is, biblically that we must watch TV with the absence of any logical assessment?


Hello. I’m Dennis. I’m a mental patient for schizophrenia. Well, are you aware of this mental illness? Let me introduce you to this monster as I personally experienced it. Perhaps, you are a parent having been confounded by how your child is acting these past few years. Maybe, he is seclusive sort of afraid of people. Or, he is avoiding social interaction, or worst, avoiding anyone on cognition. He is hiding from people. He only stays within the premises of a room with closed windows and you as parent, though how hardly you don’t understand it maximize your effort to help him. I know it’s such a difficult time for your family having a schizophrenic under your care especially if he is sort of offensive. Let me elaborate my experience for being schizophrenic as a form of education, and for you to see, which way should have been a better approach.
During the early years of my affliction, I was seclusive. The presence of people around, their stares, or simply, a hint of someone’s presence even to a—100 meters away has a great effect in me. It was constraining for me to hide. Thus for 2-3 years I have been hiding. But I won’t elaborate on that, not diminishing the fact that abnormal feelings plagued me that whenever it heightens I harbors grave desire to die. During these situations, the pressures usually arouse hopelessness. So you should know that this is an internal matter only you could behold yet not totally comprehending. Empathy is sort of useless whenever it intensifies. The best approach would be medication, prayers and much so, an apt preventive measure, simply, acts of discretion. With the absence of medical attention, it would be pointless to deliver any helping hand as in my case.
Though I was still articulate, but there are main parts of my suffering that cannot be articulated thus I suffered in silence, never able to be expressive about it. One of my main symptoms was repulsion. There was internal difficulty, one of the things I cannot explain, that caused me to repulse people. Not hatred, nor resentment of course. It was a feeling of repulsion—an internal oddity, that even my families I cannot tolerate to live close by thus I was living in a more distant house. It was an internal difficulty. Like the repulsion of a magnet, I have to stay farther though such was past but still, it has left overs and episodes. If by any means, that I was put in a situation where I cannot move farther from a person, I would have internal suppression. I cannot swallow, I cannot move and then eventually, producing involuntary and offensive neck ticking outputs. It was all battery and, friction with the people around, so as I perceived. Could it be delusion or reality? I cannot tell.
Not to mention that I have paranoia and delusion and tormenting voices in the head. These all in all sums up my main symptoms as working forces that dragged me to nowhere but nightmares—fear. There is twisted perception of the surrounding, often, in bristles of fear, often demonic sense.
Now, let me tell you about how it has heightened to one of its climax, paramount for me to have turned “taong—grasa”. I was taking Leponex for medication for more than 10 years, but then I decided to stop. It was ineffective anyway. Delusion heightened, voices in my head maximized—more than 10 voices. Initially, I believed people are trying to intervene with my thoughts through radio waves that is radar. I researched online about it and it kinds of supports my suspicion that people are focusing radio waves on my brain to communicate telepathically with me such as how world war 2 soldiers did with radar. It was voice to skull procedure, to what intent it would be it alters my perception of reality as delusion was an inextricable factor with it. That was my impression—or rather, delusion. I was hearing voices non-stop and it has some internal compulsion to believe them, so as how delusion intervenes all the time. It forces me to believe in that rather twisted reality they wanted me to believe. It was internal compulsion. It forced me to believe whichever the direction of the delusion was, and they were verbally incessant. And it was annoyances. There too, was abnormal cognition along—even, auditory hallucination. I thought people are adversarial on me bec of the result of my being offensive. My sound outputs are offensive, thus even for a mile away, I think cough sounds would affect people as far as 100 meters away, sound outputs from my neck ticking sound are offensive and I felt like I heated the community with deadly anger. Chainsaw sounds, spits, gunshots etc… are always my daily beatings and they were hateful towards me, I felt the friction. I was in constant fear always suspicious of people. Loose thoughts are concocting stories that eventually are realities to me, along these auditory hallucinations that cropped up continuously. Invasive as they were, it was credible. I was hearing my father under hostage situation screaming in pain and it was in my cognition that he was being tortured. I could imagine all horrible torture methods they did on him. Chainsaw sound would indicate him being amputated. He was screaming in torment. Thus I run away from home trying to evade this nightmare. Farther away, I was having auditory hallucination of our house being invaded and taking my mother and sister as well. It was night time and in the dimness, I find route to the national road plagued by abnormal feelings I cannot expressed. There was blood on the pavement as though someone was driven over or it was intentionally spilled. I believed it was my family. A motor passed by having a limp lady as passenger, being brought to the morgue. I believed it was my sister. Then a container van stalked me. I believed it was them. It was constant on fear, hovering like a dark mist—and brushes of fear in my chest. That was how I become a drift wood, vagrant and stowaway. That was my first time to have been outdoors after more than 10 years and as far away as it was, walking to the city for 3 months and wallowing around the city for 4 months always under surveillance of the radar people, being stalked by people or cars or vans or trucks. I tried to report this to the police about the radio waves assault on me, but it was unsuccessful.
You have to understand that the world I lived in was interactive with regards to a purely internal world living under the directives of the delusion—and voices. My cognition, perception and awareness were on fear, primarily on gruesome death and killing procedures on my family. For example, the delusion was on my family being hostage and I was suspicious on anything, cars, vans, building, people, sound etc… if the delusion suggest that my parents were delivered to a building, I would think of any metallic sounds from therein as clinical utensils, and I would believe they were chopping them off piece by piece. That would be to me a reality. Or if I see a asphalt mound on the roadside, I would believe my parents were buried in there, and always the brushes of fear was maximal. This is my schizophrenia, an out-of-reality cognition and primarily founded on fear. Everything, such as cars, people, event or sound was interconnected forming my belief in an out-of-reality nightmare, but for me, this is real.
Through the 7months of my homelessness I was consistently walking and walking around and always hungry, searching for food from everywhere, garbage bins most of the time. My cravings for food never diminishes as scarce as it was, I was helpless. Perhaps, for that 4months of roaming around, I have gone through all parts of metro manila. I endured three typhoons sheltering uncomfortably on building covered fronts. Thrice beaten and mauled by unconcerned people, including a policeman as I was taken in custody bec of trying to open a car as directed by the delusion.
Life has been always a misery—nightmarish as bedrock, relentless, primarily, to make me less of a human. Once I tried to commit suicide. I drank all of my medicine for the purpose of overdose but it was unfruitful. Death should have been a most deserving reward, but god has other plans.
Are you a parent? Having a lost son you would do extra measures to find him, including consulting diviners and spiritists, tracking his whereabouts but eventually you would surrender upon futile endeavors. It was so with my parents. But the thing that might have been effective was employing a prayer group. Miraculously, I find the way out from the city. Sort of miracle, right? Were prayers heard, perhaps? I wasn’t lost. I re-tracked back home. Later on, my medication commenced for good.
I survived bec of faith. It is the power of survival, especially for the afflicted to have it in himself such as I did. Faith was always in me, much so, prayer was always the best approach. And prayer was their best instrument.
Folks, this is part of my story. I intend for you to have an overview on what might have been happening to your son or daughter or any close figure, and much to my emphasis would advise you on one thing. May faith, prayers and love for god be your best approach and beside this, medical attention. I’m taking now 600mg of amisulpride, and for 4 years I have remission with few episodes of relapse. So I’m okay now and as proudly as I may say, I have been faithful.
For the afflicted, may god looks upon you, too. I empathize.


Proponents of the 7th day Sabbath as still a valid sanction uses Isaiah 66 to project their ideas though this is not a rational approach seeing that Isaiah 66 isnt specific of a 7th day:

Isaiah 66:22-23
[22]For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before me, saith the LORD, so shall your seed and your name remain.
[23]And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the LORD.

They suggest that in the new heaven and new earth, there will still be 7th day sabbath observance, but did it specify a 7th day sabbath?

No. It simply stated “from one sabbath to another”. It could be another sabbath than the 7th day practice, right?

Jesus, too, is a sabbath day.

Jesus is the day as referred to by Paul:
Hebrews 4:7
[7]Again, he limiteth a certain day, saying in David, To day, after so long a time; as it is said, To day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts.

Paul referred from this:

Psalms 118:21-24
[21]I will praise thee: for thou hast heard me, and art become my salvation.
[22]The stone which the builders refused is become the head stone of the corner.
[23]This is the LORD’S doing; it is marvellous in our eyes.
[24]This is the day which the LORD hath made; we will rejoice and be glad in it.

That day is Jesus being the headstone of the corner.

Acts 4:10-11
[10]Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole.
[11]This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders, which is become the head of the corner.

Therefore, what is mentioned as TODAY is jesus christ. If we hear his voice, harden not our hearts:

That day is another sabbath day as it say:
Hebrews 4:8-9
[8]For if Joshua had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day.
[9]There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God.

Logically, another day is another sabbath day unlike the literal 7th day. This is the promised rest for the people of god–another day.
[9]There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God.

Indeed Jesus is a rest–a sabbath day.
Ephesians 2:14
[14]For he is our EIRENE (REST), who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;

Therefore, to say that Isaiah 66 is speaking about a literal 7th day is wrong bec that sabbath was broken by Jesus as per observation of the jews:

John 5:18
[18]Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God.

Fact is, Jesus is a sabbath day therefore when it say “from one sabbath to another” imposed a reality of a perpetual sabbath bec there would be a never ending rest and worship in the new heaven and earth, bec there is only one perpetual sabbath, so to say, “from one sabbath to another” in reference to Jesus Christ indicates a one perpetual sabbath day–that is from one rest to another in jesus christ, meaning, there will be a perpetual rest seeing that christ is perpetual.

But they say, if 7th day sabbath is defunct how come disciples of jesus kept the sabbath?

Luke 23:55-56
[55]And the women also, which came with him from Galilee, followed after, and beheld the sepulchre, and how his body was laid.
[56]And they returned, and prepared spices and ointments; and rested the sabbath day according to the commandment.

There is a possibility why they obeyed moses law despite it being defunct:

Luke 16:16

The law and the prophets were until john…

Possibility was, they feared death penalty for disobedience.

Exodus 31:14-15
[14]Ye shall keep the sabbath therefore; for it is holy unto you: every one that defileth it shall surely be put to death: for whosoever doeth any work therein, that soul shall be cut off from among his people.
[15]Six days may work be done; but in the seventh is the sabbath of rest, holy to the LORD: whosoever doeth any work in the sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death.

But how about Jesus, why is he fearless in breaking the sabbath?

Bec he knew that his time has not come yet and he must do the will of god.

So by these reality, can you say 7th day sabbath is still valid?

There is no certain verse confirming it.


Contention is a biblical reality whether against an outsider or against the leader of the church. It is fighting the good fight of faith that gives every member rational reason to contend against his minister in matters where biblical interpretation are in adversity–that for a good result, the clarification of differences and the emergence of truth. That as valid is the christian way of resolving conflicts of faith as it say:

2 Timothy 2:14
[14]Of these things put them in remembrance, charging them before the Lord that they strive not about words to no profit, but to the subverting of the hearers.

We strive against anyone including the leader for a good result or profit wherein conflicts are resolved and harmony restored.

Necessity of errors are still a reality and we are duty-bound to correct anyone in such a state of error including the leader.

Galatians 6:1
[1]Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted.

By such, we are doing good to him.

Proverbs 3:27
[27]Withhold not good from them to whom it is due, when it is in the power of thine hand to do it.

These errors dont constitute a sin as it was not intentional. It was by the mere precedence of ignorance which by law cannot be considered a sin.

Acts 17:30
[30]And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:

Even david in his majesty, anointed of god was speaking how servants of god are flawed:

Psalms 19:9-12
[9]The fear of the LORD is clean, enduring for ever: the judgments of the LORD are true and righteous altogether.
[10]More to be desired are they than gold, yea, than much fine gold: sweeter also than honey and the honeycomb.
[11]Moreover by them is thy servant warned: and in keeping of them there is great reward.
[12]Who can understand his errors? cleanse thou me from secret faults.

We cannot deny reality that we must submit to our leader.

Hebrews 13:17
[17]Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you.

To put them in pinnacles of respect.

1 Thessalonians 5:12-13
[12]And we beseech you, brethren, to know them which labour among you, and are over you in the Lord, and admonish you;
[13]And to esteem them very highly in love for their work’s sake. And be at peace among yourselves.

But in so doing, it is an alternate measure to be held responsible for one’s opposite ideas meant on resolution rather than desecrating one’s faith secretly bec of silence thus the need for contentious measures–that as against the leader, necessary for profit, that is, resolurion. Isnt that the very bedrock of our consultation?

I have been doing that for my seven years in facebook. Ive been pointing out errors of the church. Ive been steadfast in my belief that correcting errors is not wrong whether directed to a fellow or to the head of the church but many brothers has not yet the appropriate level of understanding to understand.

These are some amendments and errors i noticed:

1. Changing suhay to saligan, an integral of our supplementary name.

2. Changing praying position from mere kneeling to prostration.

3. Changing praying direction from random to eastward.

4. Changing our church status from true church to being members only. Bro eli said, we are not the true church but members only. Previously, we were called THE CHURCH OF GOD IN CHRIST JESUS, descriptive of the true church so we were the true church then but now, we are otherwise.

5. Rom 13:1 accdg to bro eli refers to government powers but checking on context, it rather refers to church leaders.

Romans 13:1
[1]Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.

It say, all powers are ordained of god. It cannot speak of all government powers as not all were by god.

Hosea 8:4
[4]They have set up kings, but not by me: they have made princes, and I knew it not: of their silver and their gold have they made them idols, that they may be cut off.

It therefore speaks about church leaders. Succeeding verse implies taxation but checking on the greek text is not likely.

These are some of the observable errors of the church but does it mean, we are not the true church?

We are the true church bec we are a conglomeration of various members in one body.

Galatians 3:28
[28]There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

Being one body, our inseparability qualifies us to be the true church in as much as we are one with the early church. Unity being universal is our grant that we cannot be separate entity thereby we are the true church. Fact is, the true church has doctrinal errors. Example: James and the council of apostles asked proof that paul didnt abandon the law of moses, thus still, they were submitting to it yet–but it was then defunct.

Acts 21:21,23-24
[21]And they are informed of thee, that thou teachest all the Jews which are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children, neither to walk after the customs.
[23]Do therefore this that we say to thee: We have four men which have a vow on them;
[24]Them take, and purify thyself with them, and be at charges with them, that they may shave their heads: and all may know that those things, whereof they were informed concerning thee, are nothing; but that thou thyself also walkest orderly, and keepest the law.

They erred tremendously in as much as these customs (in the law of moses) were dead.

Acts 13:39
[39]And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses.

Likewise, Paul contradicted himself when he said he never go against moses law when in fact he did.

Acts 28:17
[17]And it came to pass, that after three days Paul called the chief of the Jews together: and when they were come together, he said unto them, Men and brethren, though I have committed nothing against the people, or customs of our fathers, yet was I delivered prisoner from Jerusalem into the hands of the Romans.

He contradicted this:

Acts 13:39
[39]And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses.

Having noticed these reality of the church instability, shouldnt it be proper for me to adopt it as a way to justify the mcgi’s roster of errors? And shouldnt it give me reason to correct my minister where i deemed him in error? In such a way, we are brothers, correcting one another for the perfection of our knowledge.

Hebrews 3:13
[13]But exhort one another daily, while it is called To day; lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin.

Truth, though its fixed and inerrant isnt subject to a leader’s error but should be revealed progressively through the process of perfecting knowledge.

2 Corinthians 13:9
[9]For we are glad, when we are weak, and ye are strong: and this also we wish, even your perfection.

Isaiah 29:24
[24]They also that erred in spirit shall come to understanding, and they that murmured shall learn doctrine.

Perfecting knowledge is a process where the necessity of errors are inevitable which errors are subject to amendments as sort of purging process.

Zechariah 13:8-9
[8]And it shall come to pass, that in all the land, saith the LORD, two parts therein shall be cut off and die; but the third shall be left therein.
[9]And I will bring the third part through the fire, and will refine them as silver is refined, and will try them as gold is tried: they shall call on my name, and I will hear them: I will say, It is my people: and they shall say, The LORD is my God.

It was so as reflected by the fact that the early church was not perfect.

Hebrews 6:1
[1]Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God,

Even christ implied that perfection is a future event.

Ephesians 5:26-27
[26]That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word,
[27]That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.

Such perfection manifested when we dont need teachers anymore.

Hebrews 8:10-11
[10]For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:
[11]And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest.

We are not yet perfect thus we are prone to errors such as how the apostles was in their time. With this reality, i feel i have a responsibility to intervene for corrections, thus the need to contend with my minister.

These are my reasons, brothers, why though bro eli is maligned to convincing heights at most, i will not leave him though these accusations could be true but with better understanding i know where truth lies, where truth abounds in majesty and it would never be depreciated my appreciation of the church by mere man’s misconception. This is the true church where proudly i belong and that would never change.



I heard my minister Bro Eli Soriano said that the holy spirit is god in few occassions from his UNTV bible exposition. I wasnt convinced then but on second thought i have to comply to this kind of perspective.

Firstly bec he is my minister.

Hebrews 13:17
[17]Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you.

Secondly bec there are clear indication to believe in this concept rather than just opposing it. However it took me sometime to realize my error and now im bound to defend him as clearly as how biblical truth has enunciated.

So how did i found out that the holy spirit is god?

The determinant factor is the use of the hebrew term “elohim” in reference to the godhead. It is in the plural form to mean, gods.

Hebrew: אלהים
Transliteration: ‘ĕlôhîym
Pronunciation: el-o-heem’
Definition: Plural of H433; gods in the ordinary sense; but specifically used (in the plural {thus} especially with the article) of the supreme God; occasionally applied by way of deference to magistrates; and sometimes as a superlative: – {angels} X {exceeding} God (gods) ({-dess} {-ly}) X (very) {great} {judges} X mighty.

Therefore we have a clue that it speaks of plural gods. The way to see it in biblical perspective is to see how plural gods fare in relation to creation. These plural gods were the creator of all things.

Genesis 2:4
[4]These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD ELOHIM made the earth and the heavens,

Therefore, who is elohim the plural gods who were the creator?

Firstly, god almighty is the creator, so no need to elaborate on that. Jesus Christ is likewise the creator for being an instrument of creation.

1 Corinthians 8:6
[6]But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.

The holy spirit is likewise the creator for being an instrument in creation.

Psalms 104:24,30
[24]O LORD, how manifold are thy works! in wisdom hast thou made them all: the earth is full of thy riches.
[30]Thou sendest forth thy spirit, they are created: and thou renewest the face of the earth.

Fact is, the holy spirit is still creating human beings.

Job 33:4
[4]The Spirit of God hath made me, and the breath of the Almighty hath given me life.

Being that, then the holy spirit is god. How come?

Bec he was a creator implying as an integral part of elohim and being that, he was existing before all things as it was so with all creators. That as undeniable infers a status called god, an entity being a creator thereby having a living status before creation.

How could that be not god?

Objection though would come in form of a verse which inadequately elaborated truth as then it say, god almighty was the only creator:

Isaiah 44:24
[24]Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself;

But that must be taken with a contextual mind. Its true, god was the only creator but must be emphatic of being the source of all things.

1 Corinthians 8:6
[6]But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.

Jesus was the creator by being an instrument.

1 Corinthians 8:6
[6]But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.

The holy spirit is likewise the creator by being an instrument.

Psalms 104:24,30
[24]O LORD, how manifold are thy works! in wisdom hast thou made them all: the earth is full of thy riches.
[30]Thou sendest forth thy spirit, they are created: and thou renewest the face of the earth.

Therefore to say that god almighty was the only creator must be looked at considering context. In comparison is like saying: there is one carpenter and both jesus and the holy spirit is the hammer. Carpenter and hammer are both creator. The source of all things is the carpenter. In that he is alone as a creator by being the source of all things whereas jesus and holy spirit are creators by being instruments. That as contextual explains god almighty being the lone creator. The credit of being the one “who stretch the heaven” is for god almighty but that as having a hammer (jesus and holy spirit) to have accomplished his work.

To illustrate, the comparison on carpenter and hammer is true. The credit of creation is on the carpenter not on the hammer, though in aspect reality, the hammer is a co creator, but then, considering context, the credit of creation is solely on god almighty but that as being the source of all things.

That as valid evidence to construe that the holy spirit is god. Firstly, bec he is an integral part of elohim being himself a creator. Secondly, being part of elohim then he is a creator. Thirdly, by being a creator then he existed before all things. That for certainty proves the holy spirit is god.

Can someone who existed before all creation be not god?

That would be for your assessment but that as valid proof validates how the holy spirit is god, indeed a true god by being an integral part of the godhead called elohim.